Scrolls and their updates

[ducat]

Hi I thought this would be a better place to discuss scrolls than cluttering up the rules questions thread.

In the rule book scrolls can be used by any wizard to automatically cast a spell at "face value", whether the wizard knows the spell or not.

In the errata this is changed so that a wizard who knows the spell can not use the scroll to cast the spell, and must roll only.

Why was this change implemented?

what made this a necessary amendment to the rules?

is it purely done as the sentances about casting a spell with scrolls in the book just have a full stop in them and are not in a separate paragraph ( they still read ok, but if it had been a different paragraph in the layout it would of been a little clearer it is two seperate statements)

I think more enlightenment about why this was added to the errata , and therefore if it could simply then be removed from the errata if deemed a bad idea, rather than how to errata further might be a good idea.

I know I for one will just ignore this piece of errata when we start playing as it really does not make any sense from my point of view.

Cheers, John.

[Darkson71]

In the rule book scrolls can be used by any wizard to automatically cast a spell at "face value", whether the wizard knows the spell or not.

In the errata this is changed so that a wizard who knows the spell can not use the scroll to cast the spell, and must roll only.

Why was this change implemented?

This wasn't changed in the errata, it was clarified that that was what the rules in the book meant.
Not saying I like the rules as written, but it's not a change.

[ImhotepMagi]

It would make more sense to me if the two rules were sorta flip-flopped. For example:

If you know a spell, you may cast it from the scroll without having to roll. The spell is cast at its base casting number in the book. Alternatively, you may expend a scroll with a known spell after you have made a failed casting roll to turn it into a success. The spell is also cast it its base casting number. A failed spell turned into a success may not be empowered.

If you are using a scroll for a spell you do not know, you may attempt to cast that spell as if you did know it. The spell uses its base casting number regardless of the casting wizard's school (i.e. disregard alignments). If failed the scroll, is still expended. Otherwise the spell is cast as normal. A spell cast this way my not be empowered, but the wizard never takes damage for failing the casting roll.

[ducat]

This wasn't changed in the errata, it was clarified that that was what the rules in the book meant.
Not saying I like the rules as written, but it's not a change.

See I cannot see how this is so myself.

I read the sentences in the book -

"They can however be used to cast a spell that a spellcaster does not otherwise know.
On any action that a spellcaster could have used to cast a spell, he may instead use a scroll."

Other than that the two sentences are in the same paragraph, NOWHERE can I find anything there that implys they are entwined in use, or even should be.
The first sentence says that a wizard does not need to know the spell on a scroll to be able to use it.
The second sentence then says that it takes a spellcasting action to cast the spell off a scroll.

From my reading back through this was purely added to the errata because westfallia chris appears to have misread the book in the questions thread? I may be totally wrong here but this is the only mention of it in the questions threads that I could find.

Cheers, John.

[Darkson71]

Unfortunately I don't have my rule book (lent to a club member) so I can't discuss the exact wording, but I do recall reading it in the way Joe has it in the errata, and deciding early on I was selling any scroll I got for a spell I knew (it it had a Will check) as they seemed pointless.

[Westfalia Chris]

Nice try to put the blame on me. 

If you look closely, the section on scrolls contains three paragraphs.

One, the first, details what a scroll may be used for if it contains an unknown spell - you cannot use it to learn the spell, but you can use it to cast the spell at the default number.

The second one explains what a scroll may be used for if it contains a known spell. This is a different situation from the one described in the first paragraph, and might have benefitted from an "In contrast," at the beginning since it would make it clear that the two are mutually exclusive situations  with different preconditions (i.e. known/unknown spell).

The main issue I have with the whole thing is that it is too easy for people to purchase specific, high-impact spells at their discretion. This means that in some cases it is indeed more profitable to use a bought scroll in place of learning it and with the way the loot table rolls, you can come up with considerable funds in relatively short time.

But that is a cross-effect from what I consider a sensible mechanic to differentiate between using a scroll per se (unknown) or as a backup. We discussed this at length in the FAQ thread, and Joseph agreed that it is this reading which sums up the rules' intent.

A future re-wording or re-structuring of the rule is not affected by this, though, and personally, I wouldn't mind if the "unknown" part was toned down somewhat or the purchasing process randomized a bit to maintain the advantage of the "known spell".

[ducat]

hehe I was not blaming you, but you had the only parts of the thread I could find that actually mentioned scrolls and assume that is where this issue comes from.

see I read the first paragraph much differently from you all it seems.

It firstly states what scroll is found (and how you determine this).
Then it states you cannot learn spells from them as they are in shorthand.
Then it states a spellcaster may use them even if they do not know the spell written on them.
Then it states you cast them as if using a spellcasting action.
Then it states the scroll automatically suceeds with no roll.
Then it states you use the casting number on the scroll if a number is required for will saves etc.
Then it states it is a one shot deal(destroyed on use)

My issue is nowhere does it imply that any of the following sentences especially

Then it states a spellcaster may use them even if they do not know the spell written on them.
Then it states you cast them as if using a spellcasting action.

are to be combined in any way and used exclusively together ie:you can only use a scroll if you do not know the spell on it.

The full stops in each sentence of the paragraph shows they are separate statements in a long paragraph full of statements to my mind.

The next paragraph then goes on to say that a spell caster who knows the spell may use it slightly differently. It does not state they MUST use it differently, but that they MAY use it differently which by all implications means they can use it in the normal manner previously mentioned in the first paragraph.

Oh and I do empathise and appreciate exactly what going on from my assisting with some of the Saga wordings. minefield is the first word that always come to my mind, closely followed by nightmare.

cheers, John.

[Roger]

If the Wizard cast a spell and it failed,wouldnt that be one of his actions?
I would think that using the scroll would take another action ?