To Clarify (Sorry Halycon):

- In 5e, you can only scribe spells to your book if they are of a level that you can prepare. You cannot scribe a 6th level wizard spell to your spell book if you cannot prepare 6th level wizard spells.

Originally Posted by PHB, Wizard, Class Features, Sidebar: Your Spellbook
"Copying a Spell into the Book.
When you find a wizard spell of 1st level or higher, you can add it to your spellbook if it is of a spell level you can prepare and if you can spare the time to decipher and copy it."

So, what wizard spells can you prepare as a Level 1 Wizard, level 19 Sorcerer? That's easy... You can prepare 1st level spells. That's it. This is because you determine the spells you can learn or prepare for each class in your multiclass separately, as though you were a single class character of the respective level.

Originally Posted by PHB, Multiclassing, Spellcasting
"Spells Known and Prepared. You determine what spells you know and can prepare for each class individually, as if you were a single-classed member of that class. If you are a ranger 4/wizard 3, for example, you know three 1st-level ranger spells based on your levels in the ranger class. As 3rd-level wizard, you know three wizard cantrips, and your spellbook contains ten wizard spells, two of which (the two you gained when you reached 3rd level as a wizard) can be 2nd-level spells. If your Intelligence is 16, you can prepare six wizard spells from your spellbook."

Yes, the preparing spells section of wizard says "The spells must be of a level for which you have spell slots.", However, as a multiclass character, you Prepare your spells as though you were a single class wizard of the appropriate level - and a 1st level wizard only has 1st level spells lots. It does not matter that you have a ninth level slot - you cannot prepare a wizard spell of ninth level, and you cannot scribe a ninth level wizard spell to your spellbook.

==

That's 5e. Larian's BG3, however, does not believe in things like balance or limitations, and generally their philosophy is that completely game-breaking exploits are "so funny and fun!"... So, you can rest completely assured that, whether it was the case of them not understanding the system they were designing for, or whether they understood perfectly well and chose to disregard it because they thought it would be more fun to create another ridiculous self-defeating game-break like this, it was absolutely deliberate that they coded it this way.

Last edited by Niara; 02/10/23 02:03 PM.