Variant rules for writing spells into spellbooks?

[Thanee]

Well, that's not the original rule, however. You are - of course - free to limit a Wizard's spell progression in this way (not a bad idea, really, since Wizards are clearly quite strong later on).

One question: What do you do about Sorcerers? Do they have to find the spells they learn in the same way, or are they free to choose theirs (among PHB choices at least)?

That would be drastically unfair IMHO, giving the Sorcerers a big bonus over the Wizards. Just a thought!

BTW, the original rules assume, that the Wizard figures out those two spells on his own (no source needed), at least that's how I understand them, and that he does so in the free time, that is not played out in the adventure (in the evening, while resting in town, etc.).

Well, assuming the original rules, no house rules, the scribing costs ARE ridiculous, as I said before!

And yes, to each his own, of course!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Ranes]

We're obviously destined to be forever at odds when it comes to how we view scribing costs but I have the feeling we can both live with that. (Insert smiley of your choice here.) I suppose I wouldn't fight a corner over scribing costs if my players felt as you do (and they bribed me, of course).

Is what I'm doing diverging from the rule or applying an interpretation of it? The PHB says that a wizard conducts a certain amount of research between adventures and it is this that allows the wizard to add two new spells to his repertoire when it comes to levelling up. All I try to do - and perhaps failed express - is provide a source for that research. I guess that, in doing so, I am venturing into house rule territory.

I haven't yet DM'ed a sorcerer but I've just checked my PH (page 156) on adding spells to a sorcerer's repertoire and I would stick with those guidelines. With regard to the sentence that begins, "With the DM's permission..." my players would have that permission.

Cheers,

Ranes

 

[Thanee]

About the Sorcerer and the Wizard, having the Wizard to look for a source (unless it's really easy to aquire one, as in not a real limitation, but more like adding some more flavor to the class) and the Sorcerer being free to choose his spells, creates an imbalance between those two classes, that's all I wanted to say.

If you only have Wizards, that's not much of a problem, of course!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Ranes]

My approach to wizards dates back to my 1E/2E days when, of course, there were no sorcerers to worry about. I take your point about potential imbalance - I'll have to see if and when someone plays a sorcerer in my campaign.

Off the cuff though, I'd say that the whole point about sorcerers is that theirs is an innate feel for the arcane, different from a wizard's academic manner. Given that and the fact that sorcerers can only add to their repertoires when they gain levels, I don't see much of an imbalance resulting from allowing the sorcerer slightly more freedom in terms of access to spells. Remember also that I was talking about wizards gaining new spells 'in the field'. If a wizard returns to a large settlement with substantial arcane resources, there is his source - no problem with that wizard having a wide range of spell acquisition choices. My intent is always to add flavour, not discriminate. I heed your warning, Thanee.

Ciao,

Ranes

 

[Thanee]

Flavor is good!

That sounds ok, if Wizards don't necessarily have to take what they find (sounded like that at first), with little or no choice allowed, then you surely don't have a problem there!

Bye
Thanee