3
\$\begingroup\$

I know that generally this doesn't matter, but in the case of the spell erase it can matter: Are the spells recorded in a spellbook magical? I know that spells can't be cast from a spellbook like a scroll, but are the spells themselves somehow magical?

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ "I know that you cant cast a spell from a spellbook as if it were a scroll" where does it say that? oO \$\endgroup\$ – Thomas E. Jan 7 '17 at 8:56
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ One of my friends told me about old shenanigans that went on, and then I found a post like this enworld.org/forum/… \$\endgroup\$ – Fering Jan 7 '17 at 15:09
3
\$\begingroup\$

A spell in a spellbook is a magical writing, but it is not a magic writing.

To decipher an arcane magical writing (such as a single spell in another's spellbook or on a scroll), a character must make a Spellcraft check (DC 20 + the spell's level).

From Arcane Magical Writings (emphasis mine)

Both a scroll and a spell in a spellbook are magical writings, but a scroll is magic while a spellbook is not. The term Magical Writing refers to a special inscription in a special language or scripting system that is used by magic users. The term Magic is used to denote an object, creature or phenomenon that contains magical energy. Thus a spell in a spellbook is a magical writing but it is not magic. A +1 sword is a magic item but has nothing to do with magical writings. While a scroll is both a magic item and a magical writing.

Thus Erase affects spellbook pages as a nonmagic writing. Compare it to the Read Magic spell that states explicitly that it affects magical inscriptions.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Objection: Erase uses both the phrases "magic writing" and "magical writing", and clearly intends them to be synonyms. If there is a middle ground that's magical but not magic, then Erase doesn't specify what happens to it. \$\endgroup\$ – topquark Jan 7 '17 at 19:48
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ To be precise, Erase uses 3 terms with the word magic/magical: writings of magical nature, nonmagical writing and magic writing. This usage leads to a great umbiguity. At the same time the only term that is used with spellbooks for sure is magical writing (not "writings of magical nature" or other similar), and I've never seen the term magic writing used to denote spellbook in core rules. And the word magical is ocasionally used with magic items or effects when it is not associated with "writing". \$\endgroup\$ – Ols Jan 7 '17 at 20:38
  • \$\begingroup\$ It seems that RAI spellbooks are intended to be nonmagical, i.e. no magic aura, but it is poorly worded. \$\endgroup\$ – Ols Jan 7 '17 at 20:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.