D&D 5E Read Magic?

[Melkor]

Read Magic seems to be missing from the Starter/Basic Iteration of the 5th Edition rules.

Does this seem to be by design, or simply an oversight? Was Read Magic a part of the final playtest packet (I can't remember)?

 

[Nikosandros]

In the last playtest package read magic was present.

 

[fba827]

Given such a spells limited utility/use in what has been released so far for the basic, it probably seemed unnecessary for now but I am positive it'll show up in a fuller spell publication.

I don't speak with any sort of authority. Just a hunch.

 

[Nikosandros]

If it's included, I would expect to see it moved to a 1st level spell which can be cast as a ritual. Otherwise, it would have to compete with the other cantrips.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Mearls said they removed it.

It just didn't make any sense--if you need a spell to read spells, then why doesn't every spellcaster have that spell? So they removed it, and you can just automatically read scrolls if they're on your spell list.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Mearls said they removed it.

It just didn't make any sense--if you need a spell to read spells, then why doesn't every spellcaster have that spell? So they removed it, and you can just automatically read scrolls if they're on your spell list.

I'm glad to hear it.

 

[Quickleaf]

Thread necromancy!

My campaign involves aboleth glyphs and ancient magic runes, so I've been wondering if read magic should be a spell available to PCs...

I was looking over comprehend languages and it states "This spell doesn’t decode secret messages in a text or a glyph, such as an arcane sigil, that isn’t part of a written language."

I'm assuming this is referring to the use of prestidigitation to create a wizard's mark, magic glyph traps/tricks the DM comes up with, or glyph of warding or symbol which state "The glyph is nearly invisible, requiring an Intelligence (Investigation) check against your spell save DC to find it."

So, hypothetically, a read magic spell could forgo the need for an Intelligence (Investigation) check? Or would it just identify the properties/meaning of a glyph once one is already aware of the glyph's existence?

 

[crashtestdummy]

What's wrong with using Detect Magic to find the Glyphs? After all, they're still magical, even if they're difficult to find by non-magical investigation. Why do you need a Read Magic spell to find them?

If you're wondering how do characters decipher them after finding them, that's a different discussion. I'd suggest an Arcana(Intelligence) check, or research at a library. If you're of the school that everything should be solvable by magic, then try summoning something that will know the answer and ask it...

 

[GX.Sigma]

Thread necromancy!

My campaign involves aboleth glyphs and ancient magic runes, so I've been wondering if read magic should be a spell available to PCs...

I was looking over comprehend languages and it states "This spell doesn’t decode secret messages in a text or a glyph, such as an arcane sigil, that isn’t part of a written language."

I'm assuming this is referring to the use of prestidigitation to create a wizard's mark, magic glyph traps/tricks the DM comes up with, or glyph of warding or symbol which state "The glyph is nearly invisible, requiring an Intelligence (Investigation) check against your spell save DC to find it."

So, hypothetically, a read magic spell could forgo the need for an Intelligence (Investigation) check? Or would it just identify the properties/meaning of a glyph once one is already aware of the glyph's existence?

This is already covered in 5e: Detect magic to see the glyph. Identify to learn its magical properties.