Level Up (A5E) Magic Item Price List

[Faolyn]

On that bold bit, can you quote what you are talking about in the "section o wizards"?

Wizards certainly could have every spell in existence in their spellbook yes, but they won't have anything but the allotment given by their class if they can't find anything or go broke buying spell scrolls while carrying around a black hole for gold that nearly any wizard has reason to cross copy or rent time for copying. o5e places too much emphasis on what could be in this area while omitting any methods of getting there.

What I mean is, you don't need to have a special section in downtime activities for scribing spells into their books since the time and gold needed is already explained in the section on wizards. If you borrow a spellbook or scroll to copy, that's not buying a magic item. That's negotiating with the owner of said spellbook or scroll for short-term use. Also, I don't know if it's a rule in 5e, but I'm like 99% sure that in previous editions, copying a spell from a scroll is the same as casting it from the scroll and thus uses the scroll up. If the DM uses that sort of rule, you'd have to buy the spell scroll, not borrow or rent it, which is, I believe, already covered under buying magic items.

Finding scrolls and spellbooks is also part of Treasure and not a downtime activity. From there, it's up to the DM to actually include such things in the treasure they dole out. And possibly up to the player to remind the DM to occasionally drop them.

This screenshot that Morrus posted in the "Downtime Activities" Thread includes info on researching rare spells.

 

[tetrasodium]

What I mean is, you don't need to have a special section in downtime activities for scribing spells into their books since the time and gold needed is already explained in the section on wizards. If you borrow a spellbook or scroll to copy, that's not buying a magic item. That's negotiating with the owner of said spellbook or scroll for short-term use. Also, I don't know if it's a rule in 5e, but I'm like 99% sure that in previous editions, copying a spell from a scroll is the same as casting it from the scroll and thus uses the scroll up. If the DM uses that sort of rule, you'd have to buy the spell scroll, not borrow or rent it, which is, I believe, already covered under buying magic items.

Finding scrolls and spellbooks is also part of Treasure and not a downtime activity. From there, it's up to the DM to actually include such things in the treasure they dole out. And possibly up to the player to remind the DM to occasionally drop them.

You miss the omission from o5e by focusing on the wrong part. that bolded bit used to have rules prior to 5e. With prices for copying from the spellbook of some other wizard in town it raises the obvious downtime activity of being that other wizard instead of the one copying it. The cost to scribe that spell into their spellbook after obtaining some form of access to it is a different matter from the market rate of common spells. Page 179 of the 3.5 phb pegged it at spell level *50gp &there was a wealth by level then to ensure that was not burdensome cost like the xe 133/174 spell scrolls for sale.

This screenshot that Morrus posted in the "Downtime Activities" Thread includes info on researching rare spells.

Researching spells is an entirely different thing. It's the difference between seeing a table with base prices for equipment and rules for crafting magic equipment. The same applies to the difference between scribing scrolls you expect to put i your inventory & keep vrs scribing spell scrolls for a merchant providing the supplies and some payment for the wizard's time with the expectation that the scrolls would be kept by the merchant & sold rather than staying with the wizard

 

[Faolyn]

You miss the omission from o5e by focusing on the wrong part. that bolded bit used to have rules prior to 5e. With prices for copying from the spellbook of some other wizard in town it raises the obvious downtime activity of being that other wizard instead of the one copying it. The cost to scribe that spell into their spellbook after obtaining some form of access to it is a different matter from the market rate of common spells. Page 179 of the 3.5 phb pegged it at spell level *50gp &there was a wealth by level then to ensure that was not burdensome cost like the xe 133/174 spell scrolls for sale.

Assuming you mean the time and effort of getting a friendly wizard to let you have access to their spellbook, that's something that involves RPing, calling in favors, using background elements like library access, and probably rolling Persuasion. That's all stuff that's already described. Then you pay your 50 gp and two hours per level doing it.

I'm pretty sure you can't get another wizard to copy a spell into your book for you.

Researching spells is an entirely different thing. It's the difference between seeing a table with base prices for equipment and rules for crafting magic equipment. The same applies to the difference between scribing scrolls you expect to put i your inventory & keep vrs scribing spell scrolls for a merchant providing the supplies and some payment for the wizard's time with the expectation that the scrolls would be kept by the merchant & sold rather than staying with the wizard

Ah, I see the problem here.

When you copy a spell from a scroll into your spellbook, the scroll is destroyed in the process. So a wizard can't go into a magic shop or magical library and just borrow a scroll, copy it, and then return it. This is because scrolls are one-use magic items and spellbooks are not.

 

[CapnZapp]

While I don't know if we will find a true "big 6" list here (as most items don't scale like 3.5 items did), I do agree with the notion of archetypal items. Aka, for this class, these are the items that would always be solid and welcome in a standard dnd game.

And then price works on the principal "if I were trade my archetype for this other item, would I still feel I'm getting value?"

If I were to look at the typical fighter, I would consider these as archetypes:

Weapon +X (.5/3.5/8k)
Heavy Armor +X (6/24/96k)
Shield +X (1/7/49k)
Ring of Protection (1k)
Stone of Good luck (.35k)
Amulet of Health (5k) (this does depend on current stats of course, but for a character focusing on their primary stat, this bonus remains relevant for a long time. I think its also an item that every character would want, you would never get this item and go "meh")

I'm not entering the argument "should you be able to expect those".

I'm just saying that dumping a big-ass list on us isn't too helpful in order to playtest prices.

There can and should be an order to this. First, identify the core items - the items with the most fundamental bonuses. Then price them.

THEN we can expand the list with the myriad of various items, because asking "is a Ring of Soup worth 2000 gold?" is a hopeless question. It's basically guessing, and you get inane arguments like "it's worth what you're prepared to pay for it".

No. It needs to be a functional discussion - making carefully weighted choices on how to spend any given sum interesting and balanced.

Comparing it to a piece of armor, or perhaps a save bonus, is much easier. Items with a clear function. We want the prices to reflect the rational utility value of the items.

So if a Ring of Protection is worth 2000 gold, and we believe our Ring of Soup is just about as attractive and desirable and functional as that, then AND ONLY THEN can we say whether a Ring of Soup is worth 2000 gold.

 

[CapnZapp]

Pricing magic items according to economic theory is difficult because I feel most people except magic item prices to conform to a price mechanism, where price settles at an equilibrium, allowing supply to match demand, and demand be based on the objective usefulness of an item, based on its rulebook description -- so more people would be interested to buy a +2 fork over a +1 fork, until the price of the +2 fork reaches the point of equilibrium by lessening demand. However, there are reasons to think that magic item market could work differently.

It's a game. For players playing adventurers.

The magic item economy needs to make sense to exactly one category of consumers: player characters.

Anything else and you just invite cheese of the "since +1 swords are nearly useless to the regular villager, it makes sense that my Fighter should be able to barter one for a whole month's worth of food (say a family of seven, squalid expenses, so 210 silver...)"

Just no. You don't need a price list if that's what you're going for. Just make things up.

The official price list needs to present a menu of balanced choices. The game needs to work. If a level 7 hero is expected to have 5000 gold (or the equivalent purchasing power) to purchase items with, then an item appropriate for that level 7 hero should probably cost a couple thousand gold (so you definitely can buy one but probably not more than two), because the purpose of the economy is to regulate the access to magic items.

Once a rational utility-based magic item economy is established you are very welcome to deviate from, or completely ignore it, in your own games.

 

[tetrasodium]

Assuming you mean the time and effort of getting a friendly wizard to let you have access to their spellbook, that's something that involves RPing, calling in favors, using background elements like library access, and probably rolling Persuasion. That's all stuff that's already described. Then you pay your 50 gp and two hours per level doing it.

Problem with that bolded bit is that the class is designed against a certain expected level of availability and is as far as I know the only class with a class feature that consumes gold in order to even use. Without an expected market price the gm is forced to decide one that may or may not represent something even close to the same planet the designers intended. I've seen GM's that decide copying from spellbooks is super taboo & spells are so rare that a wizard spends the entire campaign asking only to get a spellbook while the fighters & such are running around with flametongues & other crazy gear compared to the couple scrolls the wizard was able to scrimp together. Stack that against campaigns where the GM decides copying from npc spellbooks & such is just a matter of maintaining good standing with the right organizations but the wizard just assumes it will be limited like the other style. back when there was a market price a player could point at it and say "wtf" long before that point and even wotc seems to deserve a great big wtf with wizard being designed for something closer to the second but hardcovers & AL rewards more like the second

The 3.5 phb179 50gp/spell level was also not the same as "writing a new spell into a spellbook", they were two different things.

I'm pretty sure you can't get another wizard to copy a spell into your book for you.

No but finding one interested in copying spells from your spellbook into their spellbook shouldn't be impossible if there's a market price to be the one doing the copying.

Ah, I see the problem here.

When you copy a spell from a scroll into your spellbook, the scroll is destroyed in the process. So a wizard can't go into a magic shop or magical library and just borrow a scroll, copy it, and then return it. This is because scrolls are one-use magic items and spellbooks are not.

correct. Without a market price copying from a scroll & dm fiat are the only ways a wizard can enjoy the privilege of spending even more gold in order to scribe a spell into their spellbook that they hope will be useful enough to maybe prepare one day. Meanwhile the sorcerer cleric fighter rogue & so on are spending their coin on magic items that will unquestionably be directly improving their power. The flexibility that a spellbook could enable is great in theory, but it comes at a big cost that often gets ignored (especially in o5e where it lacks any meaningful way of obtaining the stuff needed to build it.)

 

[Faolyn]

Problem with that bolded bit is that the class is designed against a certain expected level of availability and is as far as I know the only class with a class feature that consumes gold in order to even use.

True, but many spells are so enormously powerful, and once you've copied the spell in you have it forever, that it kind of evens out. (Obviously, there are jerk DMs who go out of their way to wreck your spellbook just for the lulz, but they're a minority, and probably shouldn't be gamed with anyway.)

Without an expected market price the gm is forced to decide one that may or may not represent something even close to the same planet the designers intended. I've seen GM's that decide copying from spellbooks is super taboo & spells are so rare that a wizard spends the entire campaign asking only to get a spellbook while the fighters & such are running around with flametongues & other crazy gear compared to the couple scrolls the wizard was able to scrimp together.

That's a bad DM, and I don't think that's normal. I've certainly never experienced it.

Stack that against campaigns where the GM decides copying from npc spellbooks & such is just a matter of maintaining good standing with the right organizations but the wizard just assumes it will be limited like the other style.

That's a lack of communication on the part of both the DM and the player, not a problem with the system.

back when there was a market price a player could point at it and say "wtf" long before that point and even wotc seems to deserve a great big wtf with wizard being designed for something closer to the second but hardcovers & AL rewards more like the second

The 3.5 phb179 50gp/spell level was also not the same as "writing a new spell into a spellbook", they were two different things.

But we're not talking about 3.x.

No but finding one interested in copying spells from your spellbook into their spellbook shouldn't be impossible if there's a market price to be the one doing the copying.

I have a really hard time imagining any PC allowing an NPC to take their spellbook away for any length of time. Maybe if that NPC was very highly trusted...

And in that case, we already know how long it will take and how much it would cost. No need for a brand new activity. Don't forget, downtime activity is measured in workweeks. Even the highest level spells take less than a day to copy.

correct. Without a market price copying from a scroll & dm fiat are the only ways a wizard can enjoy the privilege of spending even more gold in order to scribe a spell into their spellbook that they hope will be useful enough to maybe prepare one day.

Isn't one of D&D's major issues that there's so little to spend gold on? If you're a high level wizard, you are probably swimming in gold you're not using for much of anything else, unless you have a super-stingy DM. And again, that's a problem with the DM, not with the system.

I realize that LU is trying to rectify that problem with having more costly things for sale, but in that case, it's a matter of budgeting. Scribe a bunch of spells, or buy one magic item or a new keep? Choices, choices. (Also, that 9th level spell only costs 450 gp to scribe, half that if it's your school, and if your DM is too stingy to give that out, even after talking to them about your problem, then that's a big red flag.) (Note, I said "if the DM is stingy," not "if the DM is an AL DM and can only go by what's in the book.")

Meanwhile the sorcerer cleric fighter rogue & so on are spending their coin on magic items that will unquestionably be directly improving their power. The flexibility that a spellbook could enable is great in theory, but it comes at a big cost that often gets ignored (especially in o5e where it lacks any meaningful way of obtaining the stuff needed to build it.)

Spending your money on scribing a spell is directly improving your power, if you're a wizard. Not only does it give you more versatility and flexibility in your casting choices--which sorcerers don't have, due to their limited spell choice--but if it's a ritual spell, then by scribing it in your book you get another spell to cast with no slots. Morrus has already said that they're including more spells with upcasting abilities in LU, so maybe they're adding more ritual spells--and I bet that you can use the included rules on researching rare spell variants to create a ritual version of a non-ritual spell.

 

[tetrasodium]

True, but many spells are so enormously powerful, and once you've copied the spell in you have it forever, that it kind of evens out. (Obviously, there are jerk DMs who go out of their way to wreck your spellbook just for the lulz, but they're a minority, and probably shouldn't be gamed with anyway.)


That's a bad DM, and I don't think that's normal. I've certainly never experienced it.


That's a lack of communication on the part of both the DM and the player, not a problem with the system.


But we're not talking about 3.x.


I have a really hard time imagining any PC allowing an NPC to take their spellbook away for any length of time. Maybe if that NPC was very highly trusted...

And in that case, we already know how long it will take and how much it would cost. No need for a brand new activity. Don't forget, downtime activity is measured in workweeks. Even the highest level spells take less than a day to copy.


Isn't one of D&D's major issues that there's so little to spend gold on? If you're a high level wizard, you are probably swimming in gold you're not using for much of anything else, unless you have a super-stingy DM. And again, that's a problem with the DM, not with the system.

I realize that LU is trying to rectify that problem with having more costly things for sale, but in that case, it's a matter of budgeting. Scribe a bunch of spells, or buy one magic item or a new keep? Choices, choices. (Also, that 9th level spell only costs 450 gp to scribe, half that if it's your school, and if your DM is too stingy to give that out, even after talking to them about your problem, then that's a big red flag.) (Note, I said "if the DM is stingy," not "if the DM is an AL DM and can only go by what's in the book.")


Spending your money on scribing a spell is directly improving your power, if you're a wizard. Not only does it give you more versatility and flexibility in your casting choices--which sorcerers don't have, due to their limited spell choice--but if it's a ritual spell, then by scribing it in your book you get another spell to cast with no slots. Morrus has already said that they're including more spells with upcasting abilities in LU, so maybe they're adding more ritual spells--and I bet that you can use the included rules on researching rare spell variants to create a ritual version of a non-ritual spell.

I think you have lost sight of the economic issue of a market rate for copying npc/library spellbooks & vice versa and moved on to arguing that sorcerers are so poor & oppressed that the stormwind fallacy should handle that instead. Frankly I don't understand why you seem to be arguing that there should not be a market rate to copy spells from npc/library spellbooks or an income producing downtime activity that involves a wizard PC letting others copy spells from their spellbook.

If that's not your point I have no idea what it is.

• "Some spells are really powerful"
  • mmhmm... which is why the wizard would choose those over more niche ones that might be useful. The wizard doing that with must take spells removes or reduces their ability to pull out ritual spells in 10 minutes & niche spells tomorrow. The wizard not doing that with the must take spells of course removes or reduces their ability to contribute outside of those niche situations. Either wizards are expected to scribe additional spells into their spellbook or they are not and get class features accordingly instead of a gold sink they can only use if the GM decides to give them a bit of treasure that may or may not be useful once they spend a bunch of gold scribing it
• "Spells in the spellbook are forever"
  • Spoiler: and?

    

    
    

    

    

    
    So is a class spell list.
• "no sane player would let an npc walk off with their spellbook"
  • Hence downtime where a sane PC sits there watching a paying NPC copy spells from their spellbook or vice versa
• "that kind of treasure disparity is a bad dm."
  • I point you to the ALPG written by wotc for AL where a character could have a +1 weapon adamantine armor, & an extremely magical ring like ring of protection free action or evasion among other things before a wizard can get a spell scroll at level 17. It's literally a problem that wotc encourages & without a market rate for copying spells wizard PC has no way of pushing back when a DM follows wotc's lead.
• "Level Up is fixing a lot of things by reintroducing WBL or similar & magic item prices"
  • Indeed, that is the reason why it is even more important to have a market rate a wizard can point at to copy spells & to have their spells copied.
• "Scribing a spell to a spellbook improves a wizard's power"
  • It doesn't allow them to prepare more spells. If unprepared it only does anything if prepared or if the spell is a ritual spell. If you give a fighter or something a magic item not as good as the magic items they use regularly it absolutely does not "directly improve" their power by sitting in their pack waiting to maybe get used. Exactly how does an unprepared nonritual spell "directly" improve a wizard's power?
• Having more spells in the spellbook "more versatility and flexibility in your casting choices"
  • This is factually incorrect, the rules simply do not support that. A wizard can't cast any nonritual spell unless it is first prepared. Preparing spells is only done during a long rest.

 

[Stalker0]

Just to check my assumption, wizards in level up can still add spells to their spellbook through scrolls right?

If so then I agree with tetrasodium thst we want to ensure how expensive this is for a wizard player is absolutely clear, as this is a form of gaining power just as buying a castle or a magic item is, and is a class feature.

If the system assumes that wizards have to find or purchase scrolls at full market price, and then spend gold on the copy process…so be it, just make that clear in the wizard description.

if instead the system assumes most wizard can “borrow” a scroll at a reduced price…than maybe that’s a defined downtime activity (which would be good to point to in the class feature description).

neither way is inherently bad, but they likely produce strongly different results…so it’s good to highlight which method the book assumes will be default

 

[jeffh]

On that bold bit, can you quote what you are talking about in the "section o wizards"?

Player's Handbook, page 114, the sidebar "Your Spellbook", third paragraph under "Copying a Spell into the Book", first sentence: "For each level of the spell, the process takes 2 hours and costs 50 gp."