The other week, after a series of posts regarding the origin of thieves' potentially risky use of magic scroll spells, I asked the question: "Does it make sense to transcribe scroll-spells to book-spells?"
The results are pretty decisive -- even after pointing out that somatic components (AD&D-style) would probably be missing from the magic words on the scroll, 86% of voters chose "yes, it does make sense". So apparently that's a consensus for one less thing to tinker with in classic D&D.
2011-05-30
Poll Results: Scrolls
The other week, after a series of posts regarding the origin of thieves' potentially risky use of magic scroll spells, I asked the question: "Does it make sense to transcribe scroll-spells to book-spells?"
The results are pretty decisive -- even after pointing out that somatic components (AD&D-style) would probably be missing from the magic words on the scroll, 86% of voters chose "yes, it does make sense". So apparently that's a consensus for one less thing to tinker with in classic D&D.
I think it's because D&D scrolls represent an interesting decision. You can choose to inscribe a scroll or save it for an extra punch. You can create them as a high-level spellcaster to have some backup magic. You can get ahold of a scroll that does magic you can't cast yet to overcome some obstacles. Finding a scroll in treasure is a way to find a single spell rather than a whole spellbook. M-Us can exchange spells without letting someone else see their secret spellbooks.
ReplyDeleteIf scrolls changed to become like spellbooks, or to become permanent magic items, they would lose some of that utility.