I’d like to open a serious and nuanced discussion about the Order of Scribes wizard from Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, specifically the Wizardly Quill feature.
Let me start with this upfront: Yes, I know the feature doesn't explicitly say "you don't pay gold." Yes, RAW, the cost to copy spells (50 gp per level) still applies. But the lack of explicit language doesn’t automatically make the RAW logical or internally consistent.
Here’s the issue: The Player's Handbook states clearly that copying a spell into your spellbook costs 50 gp per spell level, which represents "rare inks and other materials" required to practice the spell, not just transcribe it.
The Wizardly Quill, on the other hand, is a magical quill that:
a) Does not require ink (it produces magical ink of any color), b) Allows you to copy spells in 2 minutes per level (instead of 2 hours), c) Erases text with a bonus action, suggesting high precision, control, and magical optimization.
So... why is a wizard who no longer needs ink and doesn’t need to practice the spell still paying the same amount as someone brewing formulas for hours?
Rules as Intended?
Everything in the subclass screams “streamlined spell transcription.” Order of Scribes is literally built around the fantasy of a wizard accumulating, manipulating, and inscribing knowledge. It makes zero thematic sense that they still need to go buy rare components meant for experimenting with magic — they’re not experimenting, they’re archiving.
And in fact, the subclass even allows you to copy your entire spellbook into a new one during a short rest, no cost, no time. But copying just one spell? Back to 50 gp? It feels arbitrary.
And narratively, in a dungeon?
Here’s a practical issue: Let’s say I just found a spell scroll in the middle of a dungeon. I’m playing an Order of Scribes wizard. I have my quill, my spellbook, everything I need to start copying. Except… I don’t have rare inks. Because I’m not in town. I can’t "trade 50 gp" with the darkness around me for materials.
So what’s the point of playing a quill-wielding magical archivist if I can’t actually use the main class fantasy when it matters?
TL;DR
The subclass is ambiguous, and the RAW doesn’t fit the subclass’s narrative, mechanics, or logic.
The gold cost should at least be partially waived or clarified. Ideally, the Wizardly Quill should remove the cost entirely, or define a reduced cost for "non-ink components" (if they even exist).
At the very least: WotC should provide an official clarification — it’s been 5 years and the issue still creates confusion and house rules.
I’m not trying to break the game or argue for unlimited free spells. I’m asking for mechanical clarity that respects the subclass’s design. And for once, I’d like a discussion that doesn’t end at “Well RAW says...” — because RAW here says nothing clearly.
Thanks for reading. Would love to hear if anyone has found an official source or errata on this.
There was a very long thread about this topic a couple of years ago based on the 2014 rules. To make a long story short, you've answered your own question. The cost to the Scribes Wizard to copy a spell is 0 gp.
The general rule for a Wizard to copy a spell in the 2014 rules is 2 hours per spell level and 50 gp which was explicitly used to run experiments for 1 hour and 40 gp of materials in order to fully decode and understand the source notation followed by 1 hour and 10 gp to carefully write down the spell in your own notation using rare ink.
The Wizardly Quill provides the ink. It also automatically translates the spell from the source notation into your own notation (very quickly) so the experimentation is no longer required. These are specific vs general exceptions to the normal mechanics used by other Wizards by default.
The 2024 rules have slightly updated the description of the mechanics that are used in general. But once again the Scribes Wizard makes exceptions to the general rules.
The above post is incorrect. An effect does what it says it does and nothing more. Does the feature say it interacts with the cost to transcribe a spell? No, it does not. It very clearly does not, since the UA version did have explicit language regarding a reduction of cost that was removed. If RAI had been for it to interact with cost, why would they exclude any specific language to that effect after having included it in the previous iteration? D&D does not run on Air Bud “logic”- features describe what you can do. If something does not specifically address a point, then that point is not modified. Wizard class rules say it’s 50 gp per level, and the plain text of the Scribes Wizard does not say it modifies that. Ergo, RAW it does not, and any halfway objective review of both how this particular feature was designed and how the features that do explicitly interact work shows that copying any and all spells for free in a matter of minutes is far too removed from their existing design philosophy to be RAI.
Also, note that fixating on ink specifically ignores how the transcription cost part of the feature is written. It specifically says that the cost is partly ink and partly components expended as you practice the spell. Ergo, within the existing narrative framework having an endless source of ink does not remove the cost. Hypothetically one could argue that the cost should be reduced by a percentage, except WotC outright experimented with and then dropped that feature. Ergo, inasmuch as there can be any sense in there being a single universal baseline rate for this process, there still being a cost even if the quill were to meet the ink requirement- which is a very big stretch of the feature, not a given- makes sense. The time compression really doesn’t, but that is a separate point and ultimately narrative conventions for hard features take a back seat to the actual text.
IMO, because the feature doesn't say anything about the cost, this remains: 50gp per spell level to copy a spell.
Time is an additional requirement for Copying a Spell into the Book. The TCoE Scribes wizard reduces this time (in fact, it was different in the Subclasses Revisited UA), just like 2014 PHB wizards reduce both thanks to their Savant features.
As a side note, the Level 10: Master Scrivener feature mentions explicitly cost, so this feature overrides both requirements for the next case:
You are also adept at crafting spell scrolls, which are described in the treasure chapter of the Dungeon Master's Guide. The gold and time you must spend to make such a scroll are halved if you use your Wizardly Quill.
The above post is incorrect. An effect does what it says it does and nothing more. Does the feature say it interacts with the cost to transcribe a spell? No, it does not. It very clearly does not, since the UA version did have explicit language regarding a reduction of cost that was removed. If RAI had been for it to interact with cost, why would they exclude any specific language to that effect after having included it in the previous iteration? D&D does not run on Air Bud “logic”- features describe what you can do. If something does not specifically address a point, then that point is not modified. Wizard class rules say it’s 50 gp per level, and the plain text of the Scribes Wizard does not say it modifies that. Ergo, RAW it does not, and any halfway objective review of both how this particular feature was designed and how the features that do explicitly interact work shows that copying any and all spells for free in a matter of minutes is far too removed from their existing design philosophy to be RAI.
Also, note that fixating on ink specifically ignores how the transcription cost part of the feature is written. It specifically says that the cost is partly ink and partly components expended as you practice the spell. Ergo, within the existing narrative framework having an endless source of ink does not remove the cost. Hypothetically one could argue that the cost should be reduced by a percentage, except WotC outright experimented with and then dropped that feature. Ergo, inasmuch as there can be any sense in there being a single universal baseline rate for this process, there still being a cost even if the quill were to meet the ink requirement- which is a very big stretch of the feature, not a given- makes sense. The time compression really doesn’t, but that is a separate point and ultimately narrative conventions for hard features take a back seat to the actual text.
Thanks for your response — I get the RAW stance you're defending, and I fully agree: the Wizardly Quill feature doesn’t explicitly say it removes or reduces the gold cost for copying spells, and so under strict reading, the 50 gp/level cost remains.
But I think this argument misses the actual playability problem. Let me explain.
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!
The feature reads like it was designed for in-the-field usage, but RAW disables that. That’s not rules lawyering — it’s a thematic dissonance between the mechanics and the purpose of the subclass.
If the subclass allowed you to substitute the gold cost with materials you have on you, or if it simply said “you can copy spells without cost using the quill, once per long rest,” the fantasy would work, and the balance could be preserved. But as written, there’s this weird contradiction: a feature that gives you a powerful new tool, and then says, "but you still can’t actually use it unless you’re shopping."
I'm not asking for free spells. I'm asking why a subclass built around arcane transcription can't actually transcribe anything unless the party stops by the nearest ink vendor.
Just to clarify: I'm not trying to change anyone’s mind here. What I’m hoping for is that Wizards of the Coast eventually addresses this in an official FAQ or errata. Because right now, this feels like an oversight — and five years after Tasha’s release, it still hasn’t been clarified.
IMO, because the feature doesn't say anything about the cost, this remains: 50gp per spell level to copy a spell.
Time is an additional requirement for Copying a Spell into the Book. The TCoE Scribes wizard reduces this time (in fact, it was different in the Subclasses Revisited UA), just like 2014 PHB wizards reduce both thanks to their Savant features.
As a side note, the Level 10: Master Scrivener feature mentions explicitly cost, so this feature overrides both requirements for the next case:
You are also adept at crafting spell scrolls, which are described in the treasure chapter of the Dungeon Master's Guide. The gold and time you must spend to make such a scroll are halved if you use your Wizardly Quill.
Thanks for the reply. I’m aware of the RAW, and I’ve read all the subclass features carefully — including Master Scrivener. I fully understand that when a feature is meant to reduce cost, it typically says so explicitly. That’s part of the problem I’m raising.
But to be honest, your response doesn’t actually address the question I asked.
I wasn’t asking whether RAW keeps the 50 gp per spell level. I know it does. What I’m asking is: are there any official clarifications from WotC about whether this is intentional or not? Has anyone on the design side explained why this cost was kept unchanged even when the subclass seems designed to bypass the factors that justified it?
Because that’s the core of the issue: it’s not just a RAW question. It’s a logical inconsistency. The subclass gives a wizard the ability to copy spells in 2 minutes, without ink, in the middle of an adventure — but still expects them to magically conjure up 50 gp worth of rare materials every time, even in a dungeon or extraplanar ruin. That completely undermines the narrative function of the feature.
If the intention was for the cost to remain, then why not say so explicitly? Especially given that other features (like Master Scrivener) go out of their way to specify reductions?
That’s why I was hoping for some kind of official clarification — not just repeated interpretations of what the text says or doesn’t say. I’m not challenging the rules as written. I’m pointing out that they leave an important design space unclarified, and it affects the playability of the subclass.
There was a very long thread about this topic a couple of years ago based on the 2014 rules. To make a long story short, you've answered your own question. The cost to the Scribes Wizard to copy a spell is 0 gp.
The general rule for a Wizard to copy a spell in the 2014 rules is 2 hours per spell level and 50 gp which was explicitly used to run experiments for 1 hour and 40 gp of materials in order to fully decode and understand the source notation followed by 1 hour and 10 gp to carefully write down the spell in your own notation using rare ink.
The Wizardly Quill provides the ink. It also automatically translates the spell from the source notation into your own notation (very quickly) so the experimentation is no longer required. These are specific vs general exceptions to the normal mechanics used by other Wizards by default.
The 2024 rules have slightly updated the description of the mechanics that are used in general. But once again the Scribes Wizard makes exceptions to the general rules.
Thanks for the response — this one actually engages with the design logic of the subclass, which I really appreciate.
That said, I think there’s still a missing piece.
You mention that the Wizardly Quill automatically provides the ink and translates the spell into the wizard’s own notation, thus removing the need for experimentation. That makes perfect sense narratively and mechanically. I agree completely.
But the fact remains: the feature does not say anything at all about removing the gold cost.
In D&D 5e, a specific rule overrides a general rule only when it explicitly contradicts or replaces it. And in this case, the general rule (PHB) says “50 gp per level,” and the specific rule (Wizardly Quill) says nothing about cost. So under RAW, the cost stands — even if the narrative strongly suggests it shouldn’t.
You can’t assume a specific override unless it’s clearly stated. That’s the same standard being applied by the RAW-defenders elsewhere in this thread, and it’s fair to apply it here too.
So we're left in a weird place: either the subclass forgot to specify a cost reduction (despite giving every reason to do so), or it intended to imply it without saying so — which is extremely uncharacteristic of how features are written in 5e.
That’s why I keep coming back to the same request: can we get an official clarification from WotC on whether the cost is supposed to remain or not? Because right now we have players interpreting the rules both ways in good faith — and the text just doesn’t give us a definitive answer.
What I’m asking is: are there any official clarifications from WotC about whether this is intentional or not? Has anyone on the design side explained why this cost was kept unchanged even when the subclass seems designed to bypass the factors that justified it?
No official ruling in Sage Advice or the like, nor any Dev discussed this matter specifically to my knowledge in podcast or anything.
IMO, because the feature doesn't say anything about the cost, this remains: 50gp per spell level to copy a spell.
Time is an additional requirement for Copying a Spell into the Book. The TCoE Scribes wizard reduces this time (in fact, it was different in the Subclasses Revisited UA), just like 2014 PHB wizards reduce both thanks to their Savant features.
As a side note, the Level 10: Master Scrivener feature mentions explicitly cost, so this feature overrides both requirements for the next case:
You are also adept at crafting spell scrolls, which are described in the treasure chapter of the Dungeon Master's Guide. The gold and time you must spend to make such a scroll are halved if you use your Wizardly Quill.
Thanks for the reply. I’m aware of the RAW, and I’ve read all the subclass features carefully — including Master Scrivener. I fully understand that when a feature is meant to reduce cost, it typically says so explicitly. That’s part of the problem I’m raising.
But to be honest, your response doesn’t actually address the question I asked.
Sorry, I was just trying to reply to what you said:
- "The subclass is ambiguous". I don't think so. - "The gold cost should at least be partially waived or clarified". I think the cost is still the same. - "At the very least: WotC should provide an official clarification". It seems clear to me how this feature works.
[...] What I’m asking is: are there any official clarifications from WotC about whether this is intentional or not? Has anyone on the design side explained why this cost was kept unchanged even when the subclass seems designed to bypass the factors that justified it?
I'm not aware of any official clarification.
Because that’s the core of the issue: it’s not just a RAW question. It’s a logical inconsistency. The subclass gives a wizard the ability to copy spells in 2 minutes, without ink, in the middle of an adventure — but still expects them to magically conjure up 50 gp worth of rare materials every time, even in a dungeon or extraplanar ruin. That completely undermines the narrative function of the feature.
If the intention was for the cost to remain, then why not say so explicitly? Especially given that other features (like Master Scrivener) go out of their way to specify reductions?
That's the point. Since the feature doesn't say anything about the cost, it remains as is, and it's different for Master Scrivener because that one explicitly mentions it.
But if you feel your ruling works better, go for it.
To be honest This is going to be DMs wish in the end. I see both sides to the argument but its going to be a never ending war.
My two cents talk to your GM and figure out what is best/fun If you folks can figure out thematicly that says your quill eats gold some how then so be it.
In my game I say its free cause it works better and feels like it fits better with the class. (went with what feels like RAI)
I make a multiclass Order of Scribes wizard/Clockwork Soul sorcerer. After discussion with my DM, we decide my "spellbook" is actually a really intricate and ornate Rubik's Cube or Lament Configuration-like puzzle box, with runes engraved on metal rings that I can reconfigure to reveal different spells. (There will be definite Phantasm vibes when I start using Manifest Mind to send this floating metal orb out into the world.) As such, my "Wizardly Quill" is actually more like magical jeweler's tools, so that it can engrave new runes and rings as needed
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
But I think this argument misses the actual playability problem. Let me explain.
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.
I think that the magic ingredient that you are missing is planning. If you want to be able to scribe spells on the go in a dungeon or while resting on an island after having found the Pirate Wizards treasure horde then all you need to do is to buy the necessary materials ahead of time and carry them with you.
This is no different from a spellcaster wanting to cast a spell with a material component that is consumed. They need to have planned ahead so the when the moment to cast the spell arrives they have that component ready for use.
This subclass feature provided in the Tasha's book creates a fairly straightforward specific vs general exception to the general rules and mechanics for a Wizard copying a spell into his spellbook.
(2014 version):
Specific Beats General
This book contains rules, especially in parts 2 and 3, that govern how the game plays. That said, many racial traits, class features, spells, magic items, monster abilities, and other game elements break the general rules in some way, creating an exception to how the rest of the game works. Remember this: If a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule wins.
Exceptions to the rules are often minor. For instance, many adventurers don’t have proficiency with longbows, but every wood elf does because of a racial trait. That trait creates a minor exception in the game. Other examples of rule-breaking are more conspicuous. For instance, an adventurer can’t normally pass through walls, but some spells make that possible. Magic accounts for most of the major exceptions to the rules.
In this case, we have this mechanic:
(2014 version):
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.
Which gets replaced by this new mechanic for copying spells:
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.
It's not a perfectly parallel-looking text replacement because the text from this subclass is written from the point of view of describing the properties of the quill instead of directly describing the process for copying a spell. The point is that the quill has properties which explicitly make the normally required steps to copy a spell unnecessary and the process while using the quill explicitly becomes far easier.
The general rule describes exactly what the cost represents. Upon reading the entirety of the Your Spellbook text, we learn that the cost represents materials that are used for the experimentation that is normally needed to decode and master the spell so that you understand it well enough to be able to write it down in your own notation and that time and cost breaks down to 1 hour and 40 gp per spell level. The cost also represents the fine inks that you normally need to record the spell and that time and cost for that portion of the process breaks down to 1 hour and 10 gp per spell level.
Both of those parts of the process can be avoided by using the magical quill from this subclass. If you don't actually have to do any of the things which the 50 gp explicitly represents, then you do not have to spend that money. That should be obvious enough that it didn't need to be written. For example, if I go to a general store and I see that a crowbar costs 2 gp and then I decide to buy 0 crowbars, then I did not spend 2 gp on crowbars.
But the fact remains: the feature does not say anything at all about removing the gold cost.
This doesn't matter at all for at least a few different reasons.
First, specific vs general exceptions don't work like that. The specific rule doesn't have to specify all of the things about the general rule that are "removed" or that no longer apply. Instead, the specific rule just replaces the general rule as if it never existed. See the above quoted rule for exceptions -- when there is a contradiction, the specific rule just "wins".
Next, as a general convention, there is no need to constantly specify when an activity costs 0 gp to perform. Otherwise, we would have thousands upon thousands of mentions throughout the text of activities that cost 0 gp. What are the rules for making an Attack Roll? Well, first of all, making an Attack Roll costs 0 gp . . . What is the cost for a Barbarian to enter a rage? Entering a Rage costs a Bonus Action, but it should be noted that it also costs 0 gp . . . What is the cost of taking a Short Rest? Taking a short rest requires at least 1 hour of downtime, but it costs 0 gp. And so on. Writing the rules like that would be an absolute mess.
But how about this? What is the cost of casting Magic Missile? 0 gp (unspecified and therefore implied). However, what is the cost of casting Simulacrum (2014)? Well, in that case the material components to be able to cast that spell explicitly cost 1,500 gp. Because it actually has a cost, the cost is mentioned. Since casting Magic Missile has no cost, no cost is mentioned.
The properties of the magical quill explain what actually is required to copy a spell. They do not explain what is not required. Nor should they.
I would strongly suggest to anyone that you peruse as much of that previous thread as you can stomach, and make your own judgment on who was at least attempting to post logical, internally consistent arguments, and who was posting the kind of nonsense that eventually got the thread locked
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
This subclass feature provided in the Tasha's book creates a fairly straightforward specific vs general exception to the general rules and mechanics for a Wizard copying a spell into his spellbook.
(2014 version):
Specific Beats General
This book contains rules, especially in parts 2 and 3, that govern how the game plays. That said, many racial traits, class features, spells, magic items, monster abilities, and other game elements break the general rules in some way, creating an exception to how the rest of the game works. Remember this: If a specific rule contradicts a general rule, the specific rule wins.
Exceptions to the rules are often minor. For instance, many adventurers don’t have proficiency with longbows, but every wood elf does because of a racial trait. That trait creates a minor exception in the game. Other examples of rule-breaking are more conspicuous. For instance, an adventurer can’t normally pass through walls, but some spells make that possible. Magic accounts for most of the major exceptions to the rules.
In this case, we have this mechanic:
(2014 version):
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.
Which gets replaced by this new mechanic for copying spells:
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.
It's not a perfectly parallel-looking text replacement because the text from this subclass is written from the point of view of describing the properties of the quill instead of directly describing the process for copying a spell. The point is that the quill has properties which explicitly make the normally required steps to copy a spell unnecessary and the process while using the quill explicitly becomes far easier.
The general rule describes exactly what the cost represents. Upon reading the entirety of the Your Spellbook text, we learn that the cost represents materials that are used for the experimentation that is normally needed to decode and master the spell so that you understand it well enough to be able to write it down in your own notation and that time and cost breaks down to 1 hour and 40 gp per spell level. The cost also represents the fine inks that you normally need to record the spell and that time and cost for that portion of the process breaks down to 1 hour and 10 gp per spell level.
Both of those parts of the process can be avoided by using the magical quill from this subclass. If you don't actually have to do any of the things which the 50 gp explicitly represents, then you do not have to spend that money. That should be obvious enough that it didn't need to be written. For example, if I go to a general store and I see that a crowbar costs 2 gp and then I decide to buy 0 crowbars, then I did not spend 2 gp on crowbars.
But the fact remains: the feature does not say anything at all about removing the gold cost.
This doesn't matter at all for at least a few different reasons.
First, specific vs general exceptions don't work like that. The specific rule doesn't have to specify all of the things about the general rule that are "removed" or that no longer apply. Instead, the specific rule just replaces the general rule as if it never existed. See the above quoted rule for exceptions -- when there is a contradiction, the specific rule just "wins".
Next, as a general convention, there is no need to constantly specify when an activity costs 0 gp to perform. Otherwise, we would have thousands upon thousands of mentions throughout the text of activities that cost 0 gp. What are the rules for making an Attack Roll? Well, first of all, making an Attack Roll costs 0 gp . . . What is the cost for a Barbarian to enter a rage? Entering a Rage costs a Bonus Action, but it should be noted that it also costs 0 gp . . . What is the cost of taking a Short Rest? Taking a short rest requires at least 1 hour of downtime, but it costs 0 gp. And so on. Writing the rules like that would be an absolute mess.
But how about this? What is the cost of casting Magic Missile? 0 gp (unspecified and therefore implied). However, what is the cost of casting Simulacrum (2014)? Well, in that case the material components to be able to cast that spell explicitly cost 1,500 gp. Because it actually has a cost, the cost is mentioned. Since casting Magic Missile has no cost, no cost is mentioned.
The properties of the magical quill explain what actually is required to copy a spell. They do not explain what is not required. Nor should they.
Thanks for this thoughtful and detailed reply. Honestly, I really appreciate how clearly you've laid it out, and it reflects almost exactly the reasoning I went through myself before opening this discussion.
I completely agree with your interpretation: the Wizardly Quill removes both the need for ink and the experimentation phase, so it logically follows that the associated gold cost, which represents those two elements, is also no longer necessary. It's elegant, internally consistent, and matches the subclass theme perfectly.
That said, I still don’t feel comfortable calling it RAW. The feature doesn't explicitly state that it removes the cost, and in 5e, we’re generally used to seeing those exceptions spelled out, especially when overriding something as established as the 50 gp per spell level rule.
If Wizards were to revise this subclass in the future, I’d love for your interpretation to be made explicit in the text. In fact, at my own table, the DM and I came up with a similar workaround: we agreed that the Wizardly Quill can magically transmute precious metals or gems into appropriate transcription materials of equal value, allowing for in-dungeon spell copying without needing a store. It's a thematic and mechanical compromise.
That’s why I raised the question, not because I disagree with your take, but because the current wording leaves just enough ambiguity that we’re all left guessing. And I think the subclass deserves clarity, especially since it’s designed around spell transcription.
Thanks again for your response. It really helped solidify my thoughts on the matter.
But I think this argument misses the actual playability problem. Let me explain.
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.
I think that the magic ingredient that you are missing is planning. If you want to be able to scribe spells on the go in a dungeon or while resting on an island after having found the Pirate Wizards treasure horde then all you need to do is to buy the necessary materials ahead of time and carry them with you.
This is no different from a spellcaster wanting to cast a spell with a material component that is consumed. They need to have planned ahead so the when the moment to cast the spell arrives they have that component ready for use.
I understand your point about planning, and I agree that in many campaigns it’s absolutely possible to prepare ahead of time by purchasing rare inks and components before heading out on an adventure. But the reality is that many adventures, including one-shots and published campaigns like Quests from the Infinite Staircase or Dungeon of the Mad Mage, take place almost entirely in a dungeon or similarly closed environment. In those settings, you can have all the gold in the world and still be unable to scribe a newly found spell, simply because there’s no opportunity to convert that gold into the needed materials.
That breaks the subclass fantasy of the Order of Scribes. This wizard is meant to be a magical scholar who adapts on the fly, who manipulates spells through writing and knowledge, and whose ability to transcribe in just minutes suggests a strong utility in the field. If the player still has to rely on pre-purchased materials to make that work, the whole point of the feature gets lost. The idea that a subclass built around copying spells quickly and efficiently can only do so if the player remembered to bring "ink packs" in advance undermines the mechanical and narrative identity of the class.
From a balance perspective, I don’t think it would be problematic to allow this wizard to bypass the gold cost or transform gold into appropriate materials on the spot. Clerics and druids, despite having smaller spell lists, can freely swap all of their prepared spells on a long rest. Sorcerers have fewer spells known, but much higher flexibility in how often they cast. Wizards, by design, are limited in prepared spell slots, and that’s already the core of their “planning” gameplay. That’s where the restriction lies — not in the availability of materials, but in the decision of what to prepare out of a growing pool.
So no, I don’t think it’s unbalanced to give Order of Scribes wizards easier access to transcribing new spells. In fact, it reinforces the class’s intended role and makes their key feature usable in the situations where it’s meant to shine. That said, I strongly believe that a clarification on the matter from WoTC would be essential!
You can check the higher level feature Master Scrivener as an exemple that specifically affect gold.
Bringing up Master Scrivener doesn’t really refute the point — in fact, it reinforces the RAI interpretation I’ve been arguing for.
That feature distinguishes clearly between two cases: on one hand, the wizard can create one free scroll per long rest by using their Wizardly Quill, but that scroll is usable only by them and disappears after use or after the next long rest. On the other hand, when creating regular scrolls (usable by others), the wizard still pays a cost in gold and time, but those costs are halved if they use the quill.
This distinction mirrors exactly the situation we're debating. Transcribing a spell into your own spellbook is not about creating something for anyone else it's purely internal utility, just like the free scroll. It seems consistent with the subclass's design that the cost would be waived in that case too, especially considering that the wizard is the only one who can benefit from it.
So rather than undermining the argument, Master Scrivener actually supports the idea that Order of Scribes wizards are meant to bypass costs when performing magical writing for themselves — which is the very identity of the subclass. Or at least, that's my interpretation!
Hi everyone,
I’d like to open a serious and nuanced discussion about the Order of Scribes wizard from Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, specifically the Wizardly Quill feature.
Let me start with this upfront:
Yes, I know the feature doesn't explicitly say "you don't pay gold."
Yes, RAW, the cost to copy spells (50 gp per level) still applies.
But the lack of explicit language doesn’t automatically make the RAW logical or internally consistent.
Here’s the issue:
The Player's Handbook states clearly that copying a spell into your spellbook costs 50 gp per spell level, which represents "rare inks and other materials" required to practice the spell, not just transcribe it.
The Wizardly Quill, on the other hand, is a magical quill that:
a) Does not require ink (it produces magical ink of any color),
b) Allows you to copy spells in 2 minutes per level (instead of 2 hours),
c) Erases text with a bonus action, suggesting high precision, control, and magical optimization.
So... why is a wizard who no longer needs ink and doesn’t need to practice the spell still paying the same amount as someone brewing formulas for hours?
Rules as Intended?
Everything in the subclass screams “streamlined spell transcription.”
Order of Scribes is literally built around the fantasy of a wizard accumulating, manipulating, and inscribing knowledge. It makes zero thematic sense that they still need to go buy rare components meant for experimenting with magic — they’re not experimenting, they’re archiving.
And in fact, the subclass even allows you to copy your entire spellbook into a new one during a short rest, no cost, no time. But copying just one spell? Back to 50 gp? It feels arbitrary.
And narratively, in a dungeon?
Here’s a practical issue:
Let’s say I just found a spell scroll in the middle of a dungeon. I’m playing an Order of Scribes wizard. I have my quill, my spellbook, everything I need to start copying. Except… I don’t have rare inks.
Because I’m not in town.
I can’t "trade 50 gp" with the darkness around me for materials.
So what’s the point of playing a quill-wielding magical archivist if I can’t actually use the main class fantasy when it matters?
TL;DR
The subclass is ambiguous, and the RAW doesn’t fit the subclass’s narrative, mechanics, or logic.
The gold cost should at least be partially waived or clarified. Ideally, the Wizardly Quill should remove the cost entirely, or define a reduced cost for "non-ink components" (if they even exist).
At the very least: WotC should provide an official clarification — it’s been 5 years and the issue still creates confusion and house rules.
I’m not trying to break the game or argue for unlimited free spells. I’m asking for mechanical clarity that respects the subclass’s design. And for once, I’d like a discussion that doesn’t end at “Well RAW says...” — because RAW here says nothing clearly.
Thanks for reading. Would love to hear if anyone has found an official source or errata on this.
There was a very long thread about this topic a couple of years ago based on the 2014 rules. To make a long story short, you've answered your own question. The cost to the Scribes Wizard to copy a spell is 0 gp.
The general rule for a Wizard to copy a spell in the 2014 rules is 2 hours per spell level and 50 gp which was explicitly used to run experiments for 1 hour and 40 gp of materials in order to fully decode and understand the source notation followed by 1 hour and 10 gp to carefully write down the spell in your own notation using rare ink.
The Wizardly Quill provides the ink. It also automatically translates the spell from the source notation into your own notation (very quickly) so the experimentation is no longer required. These are specific vs general exceptions to the normal mechanics used by other Wizards by default.
The 2024 rules have slightly updated the description of the mechanics that are used in general. But once again the Scribes Wizard makes exceptions to the general rules.
The above post is incorrect. An effect does what it says it does and nothing more. Does the feature say it interacts with the cost to transcribe a spell? No, it does not. It very clearly does not, since the UA version did have explicit language regarding a reduction of cost that was removed. If RAI had been for it to interact with cost, why would they exclude any specific language to that effect after having included it in the previous iteration? D&D does not run on Air Bud “logic”- features describe what you can do. If something does not specifically address a point, then that point is not modified. Wizard class rules say it’s 50 gp per level, and the plain text of the Scribes Wizard does not say it modifies that. Ergo, RAW it does not, and any halfway objective review of both how this particular feature was designed and how the features that do explicitly interact work shows that copying any and all spells for free in a matter of minutes is far too removed from their existing design philosophy to be RAI.
Also, note that fixating on ink specifically ignores how the transcription cost part of the feature is written. It specifically says that the cost is partly ink and partly components expended as you practice the spell. Ergo, within the existing narrative framework having an endless source of ink does not remove the cost. Hypothetically one could argue that the cost should be reduced by a percentage, except WotC outright experimented with and then dropped that feature. Ergo, inasmuch as there can be any sense in there being a single universal baseline rate for this process, there still being a cost even if the quill were to meet the ink requirement- which is a very big stretch of the feature, not a given- makes sense. The time compression really doesn’t, but that is a separate point and ultimately narrative conventions for hard features take a back seat to the actual text.
IMO, because the feature doesn't say anything about the cost, this remains: 50gp per spell level to copy a spell.
Time is an additional requirement for Copying a Spell into the Book. The TCoE Scribes wizard reduces this time (in fact, it was different in the Subclasses Revisited UA), just like 2014 PHB wizards reduce both thanks to their Savant features.
As a side note, the Level 10: Master Scrivener feature mentions explicitly cost, so this feature overrides both requirements for the next case:
EDIT: ninja'd by The_Ace_of_Rogues!
EDIT2: for clarity.
Thanks for your response — I get the RAW stance you're defending, and I fully agree: the Wizardly Quill feature doesn’t explicitly say it removes or reduces the gold cost for copying spells, and so under strict reading, the 50 gp/level cost remains.
But I think this argument misses the actual playability problem. Let me explain.
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!
The feature reads like it was designed for in-the-field usage, but RAW disables that. That’s not rules lawyering — it’s a thematic dissonance between the mechanics and the purpose of the subclass.
If the subclass allowed you to substitute the gold cost with materials you have on you, or if it simply said “you can copy spells without cost using the quill, once per long rest,” the fantasy would work, and the balance could be preserved. But as written, there’s this weird contradiction: a feature that gives you a powerful new tool, and then says, "but you still can’t actually use it unless you’re shopping."
I'm not asking for free spells. I'm asking why a subclass built around arcane transcription can't actually transcribe anything unless the party stops by the nearest ink vendor.
Just to clarify: I'm not trying to change anyone’s mind here. What I’m hoping for is that Wizards of the Coast eventually addresses this in an official FAQ or errata. Because right now, this feels like an oversight — and five years after Tasha’s release, it still hasn’t been clarified.
Thanks for the reply. I’m aware of the RAW, and I’ve read all the subclass features carefully — including Master Scrivener. I fully understand that when a feature is meant to reduce cost, it typically says so explicitly. That’s part of the problem I’m raising.
But to be honest, your response doesn’t actually address the question I asked.
I wasn’t asking whether RAW keeps the 50 gp per spell level. I know it does.
What I’m asking is: are there any official clarifications from WotC about whether this is intentional or not? Has anyone on the design side explained why this cost was kept unchanged even when the subclass seems designed to bypass the factors that justified it?
Because that’s the core of the issue: it’s not just a RAW question. It’s a logical inconsistency. The subclass gives a wizard the ability to copy spells in 2 minutes, without ink, in the middle of an adventure — but still expects them to magically conjure up 50 gp worth of rare materials every time, even in a dungeon or extraplanar ruin. That completely undermines the narrative function of the feature.
If the intention was for the cost to remain, then why not say so explicitly? Especially given that other features (like Master Scrivener) go out of their way to specify reductions?
That’s why I was hoping for some kind of official clarification — not just repeated interpretations of what the text says or doesn’t say. I’m not challenging the rules as written. I’m pointing out that they leave an important design space unclarified, and it affects the playability of the subclass.
Thanks for the response — this one actually engages with the design logic of the subclass, which I really appreciate.
That said, I think there’s still a missing piece.
You mention that the Wizardly Quill automatically provides the ink and translates the spell into the wizard’s own notation, thus removing the need for experimentation. That makes perfect sense narratively and mechanically. I agree completely.
But the fact remains: the feature does not say anything at all about removing the gold cost.
In D&D 5e, a specific rule overrides a general rule only when it explicitly contradicts or replaces it. And in this case, the general rule (PHB) says “50 gp per level,” and the specific rule (Wizardly Quill) says nothing about cost. So under RAW, the cost stands — even if the narrative strongly suggests it shouldn’t.
You can’t assume a specific override unless it’s clearly stated. That’s the same standard being applied by the RAW-defenders elsewhere in this thread, and it’s fair to apply it here too.
So we're left in a weird place: either the subclass forgot to specify a cost reduction (despite giving every reason to do so), or it intended to imply it without saying so — which is extremely uncharacteristic of how features are written in 5e.
That’s why I keep coming back to the same request: can we get an official clarification from WotC on whether the cost is supposed to remain or not? Because right now we have players interpreting the rules both ways in good faith — and the text just doesn’t give us a definitive answer.
No official ruling in Sage Advice or the like, nor any Dev discussed this matter specifically to my knowledge in podcast or anything.
If interested, here's the long thread discussing this matter in the past;
Order of Scribes Spell Copy Cost - Rules & Game Mechanics - Dungeons & Dragons Discussion - D&D Beyond Forums - D&D Beyond
Sorry, I was just trying to reply to what you said:
- "The subclass is ambiguous". I don't think so.
- "The gold cost should at least be partially waived or clarified". I think the cost is still the same.
- "At the very least: WotC should provide an official clarification". It seems clear to me how this feature works.
I'm not aware of any official clarification.
That's the point. Since the feature doesn't say anything about the cost, it remains as is, and it's different for Master Scrivener because that one explicitly mentions it.
But if you feel your ruling works better, go for it.
Also another previous thread if you wish to look over it.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/rules-game-mechanics/89000-order-of-scribes-wizardly-quill-need-input
To be honest This is going to be DMs wish in the end. I see both sides to the argument but its going to be a never ending war.
My two cents talk to your GM and figure out what is best/fun If you folks can figure out thematicly that says your quill eats gold some how then so be it.
In my game I say its free cause it works better and feels like it fits better with the class. (went with what feels like RAI)
Wow, I had completely forgotten about this cool character concept I came up with at the time. Thanks!
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I think that the magic ingredient that you are missing is planning. If you want to be able to scribe spells on the go in a dungeon or while resting on an island after having found the Pirate Wizards treasure horde then all you need to do is to buy the necessary materials ahead of time and carry them with you.
This is no different from a spellcaster wanting to cast a spell with a material component that is consumed. They need to have planned ahead so the when the moment to cast the spell arrives they have that component ready for use.
This is false.
Post #2 is correct.
This subclass feature provided in the Tasha's book creates a fairly straightforward specific vs general exception to the general rules and mechanics for a Wizard copying a spell into his spellbook.
(2014 version):
In this case, we have this mechanic:
(2014 version):
Which gets replaced by this new mechanic for copying spells:
It's not a perfectly parallel-looking text replacement because the text from this subclass is written from the point of view of describing the properties of the quill instead of directly describing the process for copying a spell. The point is that the quill has properties which explicitly make the normally required steps to copy a spell unnecessary and the process while using the quill explicitly becomes far easier.
The general rule describes exactly what the cost represents. Upon reading the entirety of the Your Spellbook text, we learn that the cost represents materials that are used for the experimentation that is normally needed to decode and master the spell so that you understand it well enough to be able to write it down in your own notation and that time and cost breaks down to 1 hour and 40 gp per spell level. The cost also represents the fine inks that you normally need to record the spell and that time and cost for that portion of the process breaks down to 1 hour and 10 gp per spell level.
Both of those parts of the process can be avoided by using the magical quill from this subclass. If you don't actually have to do any of the things which the 50 gp explicitly represents, then you do not have to spend that money. That should be obvious enough that it didn't need to be written. For example, if I go to a general store and I see that a crowbar costs 2 gp and then I decide to buy 0 crowbars, then I did not spend 2 gp on crowbars.
This doesn't matter at all for at least a few different reasons.
First, specific vs general exceptions don't work like that. The specific rule doesn't have to specify all of the things about the general rule that are "removed" or that no longer apply. Instead, the specific rule just replaces the general rule as if it never existed. See the above quoted rule for exceptions -- when there is a contradiction, the specific rule just "wins".
Next, as a general convention, there is no need to constantly specify when an activity costs 0 gp to perform. Otherwise, we would have thousands upon thousands of mentions throughout the text of activities that cost 0 gp. What are the rules for making an Attack Roll? Well, first of all, making an Attack Roll costs 0 gp . . . What is the cost for a Barbarian to enter a rage? Entering a Rage costs a Bonus Action, but it should be noted that it also costs 0 gp . . . What is the cost of taking a Short Rest? Taking a short rest requires at least 1 hour of downtime, but it costs 0 gp. And so on. Writing the rules like that would be an absolute mess.
But how about this? What is the cost of casting Magic Missile? 0 gp (unspecified and therefore implied). However, what is the cost of casting Simulacrum (2014)? Well, in that case the material components to be able to cast that spell explicitly cost 1,500 gp. Because it actually has a cost, the cost is mentioned. Since casting Magic Missile has no cost, no cost is mentioned.
The properties of the magical quill explain what actually is required to copy a spell. They do not explain what is not required. Nor should they.
I would strongly suggest to anyone that you peruse as much of that previous thread as you can stomach, and make your own judgment on who was at least attempting to post logical, internally consistent arguments, and who was posting the kind of nonsense that eventually got the thread locked
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Thanks for this thoughtful and detailed reply. Honestly, I really appreciate how clearly you've laid it out, and it reflects almost exactly the reasoning I went through myself before opening this discussion.
I completely agree with your interpretation: the Wizardly Quill removes both the need for ink and the experimentation phase, so it logically follows that the associated gold cost, which represents those two elements, is also no longer necessary. It's elegant, internally consistent, and matches the subclass theme perfectly.
That said, I still don’t feel comfortable calling it RAW. The feature doesn't explicitly state that it removes the cost, and in 5e, we’re generally used to seeing those exceptions spelled out, especially when overriding something as established as the 50 gp per spell level rule.
If Wizards were to revise this subclass in the future, I’d love for your interpretation to be made explicit in the text. In fact, at my own table, the DM and I came up with a similar workaround: we agreed that the Wizardly Quill can magically transmute precious metals or gems into appropriate transcription materials of equal value, allowing for in-dungeon spell copying without needing a store. It's a thematic and mechanical compromise.
That’s why I raised the question, not because I disagree with your take, but because the current wording leaves just enough ambiguity that we’re all left guessing. And I think the subclass deserves clarity, especially since it’s designed around spell transcription.
Thanks again for your response. It really helped solidify my thoughts on the matter.
I understand your point about planning, and I agree that in many campaigns it’s absolutely possible to prepare ahead of time by purchasing rare inks and components before heading out on an adventure. But the reality is that many adventures, including one-shots and published campaigns like Quests from the Infinite Staircase or Dungeon of the Mad Mage, take place almost entirely in a dungeon or similarly closed environment. In those settings, you can have all the gold in the world and still be unable to scribe a newly found spell, simply because there’s no opportunity to convert that gold into the needed materials.
That breaks the subclass fantasy of the Order of Scribes. This wizard is meant to be a magical scholar who adapts on the fly, who manipulates spells through writing and knowledge, and whose ability to transcribe in just minutes suggests a strong utility in the field. If the player still has to rely on pre-purchased materials to make that work, the whole point of the feature gets lost. The idea that a subclass built around copying spells quickly and efficiently can only do so if the player remembered to bring "ink packs" in advance undermines the mechanical and narrative identity of the class.
From a balance perspective, I don’t think it would be problematic to allow this wizard to bypass the gold cost or transform gold into appropriate materials on the spot. Clerics and druids, despite having smaller spell lists, can freely swap all of their prepared spells on a long rest. Sorcerers have fewer spells known, but much higher flexibility in how often they cast. Wizards, by design, are limited in prepared spell slots, and that’s already the core of their “planning” gameplay. That’s where the restriction lies — not in the availability of materials, but in the decision of what to prepare out of a growing pool.
So no, I don’t think it’s unbalanced to give Order of Scribes wizards easier access to transcribing new spells. In fact, it reinforces the class’s intended role and makes their key feature usable in the situations where it’s meant to shine. That said, I strongly believe that a clarification on the matter from WoTC would be essential!
You can check the higher level feature Master Scrivener as an exemple that specifically affect gold.
Bringing up Master Scrivener doesn’t really refute the point — in fact, it reinforces the RAI interpretation I’ve been arguing for.
That feature distinguishes clearly between two cases: on one hand, the wizard can create one free scroll per long rest by using their Wizardly Quill, but that scroll is usable only by them and disappears after use or after the next long rest. On the other hand, when creating regular scrolls (usable by others), the wizard still pays a cost in gold and time, but those costs are halved if they use the quill.
This distinction mirrors exactly the situation we're debating. Transcribing a spell into your own spellbook is not about creating something for anyone else it's purely internal utility, just like the free scroll. It seems consistent with the subclass's design that the cost would be waived in that case too, especially considering that the wizard is the only one who can benefit from it.
So rather than undermining the argument, Master Scrivener actually supports the idea that Order of Scribes wizards are meant to bypass costs when performing magical writing for themselves — which is the very identity of the subclass. Or at least, that's my interpretation!
On the contrary, the fact that one of the feature specifically mention it affect gold cost and not the other means only one feature does.