Larian Studios
I was really hoping this was a bug that would have been fixed.

I am really hoping it not a feature.
It's completely ridiculous.

And I love it. HealBot Gale, report for duty!
Yeah I’m confused, seems like it would be an easy fix. Presumably they tag spells with the appropriate classes already.
Yeah it appears extremly unusual.


In the Underdark the tower we come to is actually also owned, or was owned by a Cleric of Mystra.

Would make sense she has Clerics.
But it is mainly WIZARDS which are only able to cast ANYTHING because of Mystra.
And Wizards are not automatically Clerics of Mystra.

Kinda wierd though.
Makes me wonder if a Cleric of Mystra alone should be allowed to also learn Mage-like spells. But probably not.
A wierd lore-hole I think.
It's a bug, although it should be a feature. 5E removing the Wizard's ability to learn any spell always irked me. It's going to be fixed eventually, but I will love it for as long as it lasts.
Originally Posted by Zer0
It's a bug, although it should be a feature. 5E removing the Wizard's ability to learn any spell always irked me. It's going to be fixed eventually, but I will love it for as long as it lasts.


Say what? AFAIK wizards have only ever been able to learn arcane spells, not divine.
Originally Posted by Zer0
It's a bug, although it should be a feature. 5E removing the Wizard's ability to learn any spell always irked me. It's going to be fixed eventually, but I will love it for as long as it lasts.



Wizards have never been able to learn any spells they want. They have a dedicated Arcane spell list. This was how it was in table top or any of the games, like the original BGs (2e ADnD), and Neverwinter Nights 1 & 2 (3.0e, 3.5e).

What 5E HAS changed, is the splitting of the Sorcerer and Wizard spell lists. In 3/3.5e Sorcerers and Wizards shared the same spell list. This is no longer the case in 5e (Wizards have a larger and better spell list).

Originally Posted by Topgoon
Originally Posted by Zer0
It's a bug, although it should be a feature. 5E removing the Wizard's ability to learn any spell always irked me. It's going to be fixed eventually, but I will love it for as long as it lasts.



Wizards have never been able to learn any spells they want. They have a dedicated Arcane spell list. This was how it was in table top or any of the games, like the original BGs (2e ADnD), and Neverwinter Nights 1 & 2 (3.0e, 3.5e).

What 5E HAS changed, is the splitting of the Sorcerer and Wizard spell lists. In 3/3.5e Sorcerers and Wizards shared the same spell list. This is no longer the case in 5e (Wizards have a larger and better spell list).



In terms of video games, you are correct. In every DnD video game I've played, at least, spell lists were always sovereign.

In terms of tabletop, you are not. 4E didn't have spells, so I'm not talking about that. In 3E/3.5, Wizards could learn any spell if they found a written copy and succeeded a Spellcraft check. In 2E and earlier, Wizards could research new spells that weren't on their spell list. Any spell that was currently in the game was considered a balanced option because it already existed, so by default Wizards could "research" Cure Light Wounds and Holy Word. (Wizards could also research new spells in 3rd, but that was entirely for the purpose of creating new spells since they could already learn non-Wizard spells another way).

Now, this isn't really a big deal, since the Wizard spell list is, with a few exceptions, better than the other spell lists. But it is a thing that they've always been able to do and they can't anymore, and it makes me sad.
Originally Posted by Zer0
Originally Posted by Topgoon
Originally Posted by Zer0
It's a bug, although it should be a feature. 5E removing the Wizard's ability to learn any spell always irked me. It's going to be fixed eventually, but I will love it for as long as it lasts.



Wizards have never been able to learn any spells they want. They have a dedicated Arcane spell list. This was how it was in table top or any of the games, like the original BGs (2e ADnD), and Neverwinter Nights 1 & 2 (3.0e, 3.5e).

What 5E HAS changed, is the splitting of the Sorcerer and Wizard spell lists. In 3/3.5e Sorcerers and Wizards shared the same spell list. This is no longer the case in 5e (Wizards have a larger and better spell list).



In terms of video games, you are correct. In every DnD video game I've played, at least, spell lists were always sovereign.

In terms of tabletop, you are not. 4E didn't have spells, so I'm not talking about that. In 3E/3.5, Wizards could learn any spell if they found a written copy and succeeded a Spellcraft check. In 2E and earlier, Wizards could research new spells that weren't on their spell list. Any spell that was currently in the game was considered a balanced option because it already existed, so by default Wizards could "research" Cure Light Wounds and Holy Word. (Wizards could also research new spells in 3rd, but that was entirely for the purpose of creating new spells since they could already learn non-Wizard spells another way).

Now, this isn't really a big deal, since the Wizard spell list is, with a few exceptions, better than the other spell lists. But it is a thing that they've always been able to do and they can't anymore, and it makes me sad.


THIS IS 100% false!

You are spreading complete lies mixed with actual game mechanics to win an argument. The argument is about Larians inability to see how stupid it is for Wizards to use a Cleric spells list.

In 2nd edition called ADnD as well as 3.0 3.5 4.0 and 5.0 Wizards have their own CLASS LIST. You can copy any spell from a scroll or other sources as long at is is on your CLASS SPELL LIST and you meet the requirements. The rule is not always written within copying a scroll it uses the universal rule under "LEARNING NEW SPELLS and or GAINING SPELLS" There is usually a chapter before the spell list in all editions. That must be read or information like this kills game balance.

Why would anyone playtesting printed systems ever allow what you just suggested. What would be the point of separating the damage from d6 and d8 from arcane and divine? What would be the purpose of the classes if there was unified lists mechanics and powers? They did the work to seperate the damage and the intent of all spells with the appropriate spell list in every edition. You must have been a player with a game master who didnt like to do his homework.

Please stop spreading misinformation about tabletop rules as written. Those guys work way to hard on the mechanics of their systems to not have it valued.

https://adnd2e.fandom.com/wiki/PHB_Spell_Lists

That was adnd

here is 5.o

"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."

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#arcaneMagicalWritings

I could post Pathfinder 1st and 2nd edition that do the same things But I think I proved the point. There is a reason you have never seen this anywhere else other than I guess YOUR table. It is not cause you are the ONLY one reading it right.... it means... you are wrong.

Other than that enjoy the game and have fun playing and stuff. I hope this didnt come off harsh my goal was to help. But english is hard.
Originally Posted by IAmPageicus
THIS IS 100% false!

You are spreading complete lies mixed with actual game mechanics to win an argument. The argument is about Larians inability to see how stupid it is for Wizards to use a Cleric spells list.

Please make your point without becoming confrontational and accusing others of lying.

A lack on English language skills is not, I'm afraid, enough of a defence to allow you to be insulting on an English-language forum.
Originally Posted by Zer0


In terms of video games, you are correct. In every DnD video game I've played, at least, spell lists were always sovereign.

In terms of tabletop, you are not. 4E didn't have spells, so I'm not talking about that. In 3E/3.5, Wizards could learn any spell if they found a written copy and succeeded a Spellcraft check.

I disagree. The 3/3.5e "Wizards can learn any spells" interpretation came from picking apart non-specific wording in the Player's Handbook - it's more of a loophole than intentional ruling. Learning also doesn't mean the same as actually being able to cast the spell.

Quote
Page 179 of the 3.5E PHB

Spells Copied from Another’s Spellbook or a Scroll:
A wizard can also add a spell to her book whenever she encounters one on a magic scroll or in another wizard’s spellbook. No matter what the spell’s source, the wizard must first decipher the magical writing (see Arcane Magical Writings, above). Next, she must spend a day studying the spell. At the end of the day, she must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell’s level). A wizard who has specialized in a school of spells gains a +2 bonus on the Spellcraft check if the new spell is from her specialty school. She cannot, however, learn any spells from her prohibited schools. If the check succeeds, the wizard understands the spell and can copy it into her spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook, below). The process leaves a spellbook that was copied from unharmed, but a spell successfully copied from a magic scroll disappears from the parchment.


Page 178 of the 3.5E PHB:

ARCANE MAGICAL WRITINGS
To record an arcane spell in written form, a character uses complex notation that describes the magical forces involved in the spell. The notation constitutes a universal arcane language that wizards have discovered, not invented. The writer uses the same system no matter what her native language or culture. However, each character uses the system in her own way. Another person’s magical writing remains incomprehensible to even the most powerful wizard until she takes time to study and decipher it. To decipher an arcane magical writing (such as a single spell in written form in another’s spellbook or on a scroll), a character must make a Spellcraft check (DC 20 + the spell’s level). If the skill check fails, the character cannot attempt to read that particular spell again until the next day. A read magic spell automatically deciphers a magical writing without a skill check. If the person who created the magical writing is on hand to help the reader, success is also automatic.

Highlights are mine. While it never outright states that spells must be learned from the Wiz/Sorc list, the intention is arguably there with the multiple references to "Arcane" Writing. Regardless, even IF wizards can add divine magic into their spellbooks, they cannot cast it per the PHB, which states:

Quote

Page 56 of the 3.5E PHB:
A wizard casts arcane spells (the same type of spells available to sorcerers and bards), which are drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list (page 192)

Page 172 of the 3.5E PHB:
LEVEL
The next line of a spell description gives the spell’s level, a number between 0 and 9 that defines the spell’s relative power. This number is preceded by an abbreviation for the class whose members can cast the spell. The Level entry also indicates whether a spell is a domain spell and, if so, what its domain and its level as a domain spell are. A spell’s level affects the DC for any save allowed against the effect. "

The note about Sorcerer/Wizard spells is extra important because Bards in 3.5e do have cure spells that are classified as Arcane. Furthermore, if your class abbreviation isn't in the spell description, you can't cast it.





Originally Posted by Zer0

In 2E and earlier, Wizards could research new spells that weren't on their spell list. Any spell that was currently in the game was considered a balanced option because it already existed, so by default Wizards could "research" Cure Light Wounds and Holy Word. (Wizards could also research new spells in 3rd, but that was entirely for the purpose of creating new spells since they could already learn non-Wizard spells another way).

Wizards can research and create new spells in 3/3.5, but the DMG went out of their way to state their intentions - limitations of what spells each class should have. From the "Creating New Spells" section of the DMG:

Quote


Page 35 of the 3.5E DMG:

"Wizards and sorcerers should not cast healing spells, but they should have the best offensive spells. If the spell is flashy or dramatic, it should probably be a wizard/sorcerer spell."

"Clerics are best at spells that deal with alignment and have the best selection of curative and repair spells. They also have the best selection of information-gathering spells, such as commune and divination."

I’ve not played d&d since 3.5 but as I recall wizards learn spells whereas clerics get theirs from interaction with their gods I.e. divine power.
Mages can’t do both as you cant just learn divine spells without a fundamental change of class.
Originally Posted by Merry Mayhem
I was really hoping this was a bug that would have been fixed.

I am really hoping it not a feature.

I am confused, it wasn't included in the patch notes but you expected it to be fixed anyway? Also, if you don't like it, don't have your characters do it. Someone else making Gale a healbot has no effect on your game. Personally, I agree that it shouldn't be there, but it is and it's really irrelevant so I don't need resources spent to "fix" it.
Originally Posted by RumRunner151
Originally Posted by Merry Mayhem
I was really hoping this was a bug that would have been fixed.

I am really hoping it not a feature.

I am confused, it wasn't included in the patch notes but you expected it to be fixed anyway? Also, if you don't like it, don't have your characters do it. Someone else making Gale a healbot has no effect on your game. Personally, I agree that it shouldn't be there, but it is and it's really irrelevant so I don't need resources spent to "fix" it.


+1

Fuck suggestions trying to limit how other people may wish to play. Furthermore, what is the point of getting annoyed with wizards casting clerical spells when combat can be carried out with a backpack banquet at a whim and healing potions seem to fall from the sky and land indiscriminately over the land of Faerun?
Consider the possibility that they design and balance encounters based on the assumption that a Wizard, if you have one, is legitimately a capable healer beause they can easily learn those spells and prepare them if you need; consider them basing how they design things, in part, on the premise that Wizard counts as a heal-capable class. The "It doesn't affect you" argument seems friendly and open on the surface, but it only holds water until it doesn't, and if this bug is actually a design choice, then the odds of it affecting their encounter design are not insignificant... so we need to know, because THAT, if it happens, DOES affect all of us, whether we make use of it or not.... and making a vocal issue of it does, indeed, matter.
Originally Posted by RumRunner151
I am confused, it wasn't included in the patch notes but you expected it to be fixed anyway? Also, if you don't like it, don't have your characters do it. Someone else making Gale a healbot has no effect on your game. Personally, I agree that it shouldn't be there, but it is and it's really irrelevant so I don't need resources spent to "fix" it.


What Niara said:
Originally Posted by Niara
Consider the possibility that they design and balance encounters based on the assumption that a Wizard, if you have one, is legitimately a capable healer beause they can easily learn those spells and prepare them if you need; consider them basing how they design things, in part, on the premise that Wizard counts as a heal-capable class. The "It doesn't affect you" argument seems friendly and open on the surface, but it only holds water until it doesn't, and if this bug is actually a design choice, then the odds of it affecting their encounter design are not insignificant... so we need to know, because THAT, if it happens, DOES affect all of us, whether we make use of it or not.... and making a vocal issue of it does, indeed, matter.


Also because wizards learning clerics spells in any D&D is, and always has been, wrong. Anyone telling you otherwise is playing homebrew rules (as noted above by Topgoon who did excellent sourcing of actual rules as well as IAmPageicus) and Baldur's Gate 3 is supposed to be using D&D 5e rules (with only minimal deviations from the rules appropriate to making it a video game, which BG1 and BG2 did fairly well).
Originally Posted by 5E Player's Hand 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 you can copy cantrips into your spellbook too which should not be possible with RAW. Reasdon I bring that up is found a shocking grasp scroll and was able to add it to the spellbook.

You kind of get the feeling Larian views all the 5E rules as just suggestions.
Originally Posted by Merry Mayhem
Originally Posted by 5E Player's Hand 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 you can copy cantrips into your spellbook too which should not be possible with RAW. Reasdon I bring that up is found a shocking grasp scroll and was able to add it to the spellbook.

You kind of get the feeling Larian views all the 5E rules as just suggestions.


I haven’t played patch 3 yet, but in the earlier versions all your special abilities were lumped into a ‘spellbook’ not just spells, whether you were a wizard or not. I think they have some work to do – only wizards are supposed to keep their spells in books.
Each class that can cast spells has a list of spells.
Each char can only learn spells that are on the spell list of a class (s)he has.
Wizards can only learn spells from the wizard list, clerics can only learn spells from the cleric list and so on.
In 5E chars can only use scrolls of a class they have levels in.
In 3E chars could use scrolls of other classes and magic items with the "use magic device"skill, but even then they could only learn spells from the spell list of their class.

There are exceptions but they must be written in the class description. For example:
- Clerics can learn some spells as domain spells and some of these domain spells are not on the cleric spell list, but the rules say that domain spells are considered cleric spells for this char.
- Bards can learn spells from other classes ( especially lore bards ) and the rules say that those spells are considered bard spells based on cha for this char.
- Warlocks get spells from their patron
- Chars can get spells because of race/background/feat. In this case the description says what stat the spell is based on.

So at the moment the game has 2 bugs regarding those issues:
- Wizards can learn ALL spells from scrolls. They should only be able to learn wizard spells from scrolls.
- Character should only be able to use scrolls if the spell is on the spell list of a class they have.

I think I read something that you need a skill check when you want to cast a spell from a scroll of your own class if the spell on the scroll is such a high level that you have no spell slots for this level.
Like a lv4 wizard ( only spell slots for level 1 and 2 ) wants to use a haste scroll ( lv3 spell ).
I am not 100% sure and I am also not 100% if it was 5E or another edition.
That's correct, Mad... you have to make a skill check using your casting ability to attempt to use a scroll if it's of a level higher than you can cast; the dc is 10 plus the level of the spell - so in your example, the wizard can't access 3rd level spells yet, and would need to roll a d20 plus their Int modifier, aiming to meet or beat a DC of 13. If they fail, the scroll is still destroyed, so it's risky.
Wizards should not cast clerics spells.
Originally Posted by DistantStranger
Originally Posted by RumRunner151
Originally Posted by Merry Mayhem
I was really hoping this was a bug that would have been fixed.

I am really hoping it not a feature.

I am confused, it wasn't included in the patch notes but you expected it to be fixed anyway? Also, if you don't like it, don't have your characters do it. Someone else making Gale a healbot has no effect on your game. Personally, I agree that it shouldn't be there, but it is and it's really irrelevant so I don't need resources spent to "fix" it.


+1

#### suggestions trying to limit how other people may wish to play. Furthermore, what is the point of getting annoyed with wizards casting clerical spells when combat can be carried out with a backpack banquet at a whim and healing potions seem to fall from the sky and land indiscriminately over the land of Faerun?

That's what modding is for. Changing the rules.

"Don't do it if you don't like it" always comes up but it completely misses the point. Human brain doesn't work that way. It doesn't like to illogically make bad decisions when there are good decisions available. In this case making your Wizards more powerful or choosing not to. Self imposed restrictions within game rules feel very bad, like there's something wrong with the game.

D&D is very clear about dividing magic into Arcane and Divine sources and not mixing those up. It's not up to a house rule. Entire classes are based on that.
So what? Let my Wizard learn all the spells he wants, dammit! Be more flexible, people.
Originally Posted by MarcoNeves
So what? Let my Wizard learn all the spells he wants, dammit! Be more flexible, people.


Then you want a different game than Baldur's Gate (1, 2, or 3), one that is not based on Dungeons & Dragons of any edition.
© Larian Studios forums