Mixing
What would a Warlock understand from written spells outside of their class, via Eyes of the Rune Keeper?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
9
down vote
favorite
This related question asks if you could transcribe a ritual spell to the warlock book via the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation regardless of spell lists, and the answers were generally "yes, but you can't tell what the spell is".
This other one asks if you had the Eyes of the Rune Keeper invocation, "could you cast a scroll of a spell outside of your spell list?", and the answer, using a quote from Crawford, was that you cannot cast the spell since it was out of your spell list (but it did not state if you could actually read the scroll).
By this point, you can probably guess where I'm getting at.
The description of the Warlock eldritch invocation, Eyes of the Rune Keeper:
You can read all writing. You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning.
The rules on scrolls outside of your spell list:
If the spell is on your class’s spell list, you can read the scroll and cast its spell without providing any material Components. Otherwise, the scroll is unintelligible.
Can I understand magical literature that is normally outside of my class list if I have the Eyes of the Rune Keeper?
What would I be able to identify from a written spell with Eyes of the Rune Keeper?
Note: I am not asking if I can cast spells outside of my class with the invocation; I am asking if I can understand the nature of the scroll/spell, even if I can't cast from it.
Related: Can Warlock's Eyes of the Rune Keeper decipher written code?
dnd-5e spells warlock languages eldritch-invocations
edited Aug 10 at 19:39
V2Blast
13.3k23286
asked Aug 9 at 18:38
Daniel Zastoupil
3,7951047
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
9
down vote
favorite
This related question asks if you could transcribe a ritual spell to the warlock book via the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation regardless of spell lists, and the answers were generally "yes, but you can't tell what the spell is".
This other one asks if you had the Eyes of the Rune Keeper invocation, "could you cast a scroll of a spell outside of your spell list?", and the answer, using a quote from Crawford, was that you cannot cast the spell since it was out of your spell list (but it did not state if you could actually read the scroll).
By this point, you can probably guess where I'm getting at.
The description of the Warlock eldritch invocation, Eyes of the Rune Keeper:
You can read all writing. You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning.
The rules on scrolls outside of your spell list:
If the spell is on your class’s spell list, you can read the scroll and cast its spell without providing any material Components. Otherwise, the scroll is unintelligible.
Can I understand magical literature that is normally outside of my class list if I have the Eyes of the Rune Keeper?
What would I be able to identify from a written spell with Eyes of the Rune Keeper?
Note: I am not asking if I can cast spells outside of my class with the invocation; I am asking if I can understand the nature of the scroll/spell, even if I can't cast from it.
Related: Can Warlock's Eyes of the Rune Keeper decipher written code?
dnd-5e spells warlock languages eldritch-invocations
edited Aug 10 at 19:39
V2Blast
13.3k23286
asked Aug 9 at 18:38
Daniel Zastoupil
3,7951047
What are you trying to accomplish by simply reading a spell scroll if not to cast it? Are you hoping to be able to read and know what the spell is? Or some other reason?
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:25
@Rubiksmoose I think it would be very valuable for a merchant/archeologist to know how to read every magical spell in the world. But specifically, I want to combine it with The Book of Ancient Secrets to search out rituals to gather.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:27
my intent was not to imply that it wasn't enough, but to clarify if that was indeed what you wanted to do / meant by "read". So it is correct that you are primarily interested in reading the scroll to discover what the spell is on it then? If so, you should edit it into your question as you never actually state that.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:29
@Rubiksmoose Correct, I edited my question to address this explicitly.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:30
2
I made an edit to emphasize the question by integrating your related questions into your text and moving the remaining ones to the bottom. I think this improves readability, but if you dislike it feel free to revert it. Generally, there is no need to cite related questions that you don't specifically reference in your question itself though there is nothing wrong with it.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:49
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
9
down vote
favorite
up vote
9
down vote
favorite
This related question asks if you could transcribe a ritual spell to the warlock book via the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation regardless of spell lists, and the answers were generally "yes, but you can't tell what the spell is".
This other one asks if you had the Eyes of the Rune Keeper invocation, "could you cast a scroll of a spell outside of your spell list?", and the answer, using a quote from Crawford, was that you cannot cast the spell since it was out of your spell list (but it did not state if you could actually read the scroll).
By this point, you can probably guess where I'm getting at.
The description of the Warlock eldritch invocation, Eyes of the Rune Keeper:
You can read all writing. You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning.
The rules on scrolls outside of your spell list:
If the spell is on your class’s spell list, you can read the scroll and cast its spell without providing any material Components. Otherwise, the scroll is unintelligible.
Can I understand magical literature that is normally outside of my class list if I have the Eyes of the Rune Keeper?
What would I be able to identify from a written spell with Eyes of the Rune Keeper?
Note: I am not asking if I can cast spells outside of my class with the invocation; I am asking if I can understand the nature of the scroll/spell, even if I can't cast from it.
Related: Can Warlock's Eyes of the Rune Keeper decipher written code?
dnd-5e spells warlock languages eldritch-invocations
edited Aug 10 at 19:39
V2Blast
13.3k23286
asked Aug 9 at 18:38
Daniel Zastoupil
3,7951047
This related question asks if you could transcribe a ritual spell to the warlock book via the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation regardless of spell lists, and the answers were generally "yes, but you can't tell what the spell is".
This other one asks if you had the Eyes of the Rune Keeper invocation, "could you cast a scroll of a spell outside of your spell list?", and the answer, using a quote from Crawford, was that you cannot cast the spell since it was out of your spell list (but it did not state if you could actually read the scroll).
By this point, you can probably guess where I'm getting at.
The description of the Warlock eldritch invocation, Eyes of the Rune Keeper:
You can read all writing. You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning.
The rules on scrolls outside of your spell list:
If the spell is on your class’s spell list, you can read the scroll and cast its spell without providing any material Components. Otherwise, the scroll is unintelligible.
Can I understand magical literature that is normally outside of my class list if I have the Eyes of the Rune Keeper?
What would I be able to identify from a written spell with Eyes of the Rune Keeper?
Note: I am not asking if I can cast spells outside of my class with the invocation; I am asking if I can understand the nature of the scroll/spell, even if I can't cast from it.
Related: Can Warlock's Eyes of the Rune Keeper decipher written code?
dnd-5e spells warlock languages eldritch-invocations
edited Aug 10 at 19:39
V2Blast
13.3k23286
asked Aug 9 at 18:38
Daniel Zastoupil
3,7951047
edited Aug 10 at 19:39
V2Blast
13.3k23286
edited Aug 10 at 19:39
V2Blast
13.3k23286
edited Aug 10 at 19:39
V2Blast
13.3k23286
13.3k23286
asked Aug 9 at 18:38
Daniel Zastoupil
3,7951047
asked Aug 9 at 18:38
Daniel Zastoupil
3,7951047
asked Aug 9 at 18:38
Daniel Zastoupil
3,7951047
3,7951047
What are you trying to accomplish by simply reading a spell scroll if not to cast it? Are you hoping to be able to read and know what the spell is? Or some other reason?
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:25
@Rubiksmoose I think it would be very valuable for a merchant/archeologist to know how to read every magical spell in the world. But specifically, I want to combine it with The Book of Ancient Secrets to search out rituals to gather.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:27
my intent was not to imply that it wasn't enough, but to clarify if that was indeed what you wanted to do / meant by "read". So it is correct that you are primarily interested in reading the scroll to discover what the spell is on it then? If so, you should edit it into your question as you never actually state that.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:29
@Rubiksmoose Correct, I edited my question to address this explicitly.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:30
2
I made an edit to emphasize the question by integrating your related questions into your text and moving the remaining ones to the bottom. I think this improves readability, but if you dislike it feel free to revert it. Generally, there is no need to cite related questions that you don't specifically reference in your question itself though there is nothing wrong with it.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:49
 |Â
show 2 more comments
What are you trying to accomplish by simply reading a spell scroll if not to cast it? Are you hoping to be able to read and know what the spell is? Or some other reason?
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:25
@Rubiksmoose I think it would be very valuable for a merchant/archeologist to know how to read every magical spell in the world. But specifically, I want to combine it with The Book of Ancient Secrets to search out rituals to gather.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:27
my intent was not to imply that it wasn't enough, but to clarify if that was indeed what you wanted to do / meant by "read". So it is correct that you are primarily interested in reading the scroll to discover what the spell is on it then? If so, you should edit it into your question as you never actually state that.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:29
@Rubiksmoose Correct, I edited my question to address this explicitly.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:30
2
I made an edit to emphasize the question by integrating your related questions into your text and moving the remaining ones to the bottom. I think this improves readability, but if you dislike it feel free to revert it. Generally, there is no need to cite related questions that you don't specifically reference in your question itself though there is nothing wrong with it.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:49
What are you trying to accomplish by simply reading a spell scroll if not to cast it? Are you hoping to be able to read and know what the spell is? Or some other reason?
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:25
What are you trying to accomplish by simply reading a spell scroll if not to cast it? Are you hoping to be able to read and know what the spell is? Or some other reason?
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:25
@Rubiksmoose I think it would be very valuable for a merchant/archeologist to know how to read every magical spell in the world. But specifically, I want to combine it with The Book of Ancient Secrets to search out rituals to gather.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:27
@Rubiksmoose I think it would be very valuable for a merchant/archeologist to know how to read every magical spell in the world. But specifically, I want to combine it with The Book of Ancient Secrets to search out rituals to gather.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:27
my intent was not to imply that it wasn't enough, but to clarify if that was indeed what you wanted to do / meant by "read". So it is correct that you are primarily interested in reading the scroll to discover what the spell is on it then? If so, you should edit it into your question as you never actually state that.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:29
my intent was not to imply that it wasn't enough, but to clarify if that was indeed what you wanted to do / meant by "read". So it is correct that you are primarily interested in reading the scroll to discover what the spell is on it then? If so, you should edit it into your question as you never actually state that.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:29
@Rubiksmoose Correct, I edited my question to address this explicitly.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:30
@Rubiksmoose Correct, I edited my question to address this explicitly.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:30
2
2
I made an edit to emphasize the question by integrating your related questions into your text and moving the remaining ones to the bottom. I think this improves readability, but if you dislike it feel free to revert it. Generally, there is no need to cite related questions that you don't specifically reference in your question itself though there is nothing wrong with it.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:49
I made an edit to emphasize the question by integrating your related questions into your text and moving the remaining ones to the bottom. I think this improves readability, but if you dislike it feel free to revert it. Generally, there is no need to cite related questions that you don't specifically reference in your question itself though there is nothing wrong with it.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:49
 |Â
show 2 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
12
down vote
No. Eyes of the Rune Keeper Does Not Read Spells.
tl;dr "Generally, you would not know anything about a scroll, even if you can read every language. Scrolls don't use a language." – Daniel Zastoupil
In short, the words (if any) could be understood in a literal sense, but that doesn't get the meaning nor substance of the spell. Spells, such as those on scrolls, don't have linguistic meaning. They are a cipher.
A spell scroll bears the words of a single spell, written in a mystical cipher.
Ciphers are (generally) not pronounceable.
An example simple cipher using rot-13 of "i am a cipher" has the cipher text:
v nz n pvcure
There is no meaningful pronunciation once the letters are rotated. Other ciphers such as digraph substitution are even less intelligible.
No Linguistic Meaning.
In the case a cipher is chosen such that the cipher text is pronounceable, they wouldn't necessarily be words with a linguistic meaning. For example, while pronounceable, the following cipher text is gibberish:
malveS IBEr OLma ScriANg BOAGern EYmpGREn ToR nUmialaM
Pronounceable Codes are Cryptolects
While the warlock would be able to technically read and pronounce the words, they would be unintelligible.
The ability does not now endow the possessor with the ability to
understand codes. Even if the spell was not strictly a cipher, but a cryptolect analogous to thieve's cant or irish traveller's language, it would still be unintelligible.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read all writing. That doesn't mean you understand a secret code being delivered by that writing. For example, you might read, "Sunset Dog Potato," and have no idea that's code for something. #DnD
Reading & Casting Clarification by JC
Jeremy Crawford answered a related question about casting in this thread.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any. #DnD
answered Aug 9 at 18:54
Grosscol
3,836633
My question addresses this, and one of the links I posted on my question leads to that same quote as a reference. Crawford states you cannot cast a spell. He does not say whether or not you can read it. Just because you can read it and understand it does not mean you can cast a spell, and he said you just can't cast it. But can you read it?
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:21
-Crawford: "Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any." -Person: "so does that mean they could read spell scrolls and cast with the normal DC for spell scroll castings?!"-Crawford: "Nope"
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:22
1
The "if any" is an important part I think. Many ciphers don't have linguistic meaning.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:31
1
Generally, cipher text cannot even be read. Do you think it would be useful to add examples of ciphers to the answer?
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:55
1
@DanielZastoupil that is a very succinct way of summarizing it. I'll add that to the answer.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 20:09
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
The ability states that "You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning." The magical properties of a spell scroll have nothing to do with its linguistic meaning, so simply being able to read the words on the scroll does not allow you to bypass class requirements for casting spells and the like. You could probably still read the literal words on a spell scroll, you just won't know how to use them to cast the spell. And of course, this is all assuming that the scroll is even written using words with linguistic meanings, which is not necessarily the case.
answered Aug 9 at 18:52
Ryan Thompson
1,973532
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
12
down vote
No. Eyes of the Rune Keeper Does Not Read Spells.
tl;dr "Generally, you would not know anything about a scroll, even if you can read every language. Scrolls don't use a language." – Daniel Zastoupil
In short, the words (if any) could be understood in a literal sense, but that doesn't get the meaning nor substance of the spell. Spells, such as those on scrolls, don't have linguistic meaning. They are a cipher.
A spell scroll bears the words of a single spell, written in a mystical cipher.
Ciphers are (generally) not pronounceable.
An example simple cipher using rot-13 of "i am a cipher" has the cipher text:
v nz n pvcure
There is no meaningful pronunciation once the letters are rotated. Other ciphers such as digraph substitution are even less intelligible.
No Linguistic Meaning.
In the case a cipher is chosen such that the cipher text is pronounceable, they wouldn't necessarily be words with a linguistic meaning. For example, while pronounceable, the following cipher text is gibberish:
malveS IBEr OLma ScriANg BOAGern EYmpGREn ToR nUmialaM
Pronounceable Codes are Cryptolects
While the warlock would be able to technically read and pronounce the words, they would be unintelligible.
The ability does not now endow the possessor with the ability to
understand codes. Even if the spell was not strictly a cipher, but a cryptolect analogous to thieve's cant or irish traveller's language, it would still be unintelligible.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read all writing. That doesn't mean you understand a secret code being delivered by that writing. For example, you might read, "Sunset Dog Potato," and have no idea that's code for something. #DnD
Reading & Casting Clarification by JC
Jeremy Crawford answered a related question about casting in this thread.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any. #DnD
answered Aug 9 at 18:54
Grosscol
3,836633
My question addresses this, and one of the links I posted on my question leads to that same quote as a reference. Crawford states you cannot cast a spell. He does not say whether or not you can read it. Just because you can read it and understand it does not mean you can cast a spell, and he said you just can't cast it. But can you read it?
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:21
-Crawford: "Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any." -Person: "so does that mean they could read spell scrolls and cast with the normal DC for spell scroll castings?!"-Crawford: "Nope"
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:22
1
The "if any" is an important part I think. Many ciphers don't have linguistic meaning.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:31
1
Generally, cipher text cannot even be read. Do you think it would be useful to add examples of ciphers to the answer?
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:55
1
@DanielZastoupil that is a very succinct way of summarizing it. I'll add that to the answer.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 20:09
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
12
down vote
No. Eyes of the Rune Keeper Does Not Read Spells.
tl;dr "Generally, you would not know anything about a scroll, even if you can read every language. Scrolls don't use a language." – Daniel Zastoupil
In short, the words (if any) could be understood in a literal sense, but that doesn't get the meaning nor substance of the spell. Spells, such as those on scrolls, don't have linguistic meaning. They are a cipher.
A spell scroll bears the words of a single spell, written in a mystical cipher.
Ciphers are (generally) not pronounceable.
An example simple cipher using rot-13 of "i am a cipher" has the cipher text:
v nz n pvcure
There is no meaningful pronunciation once the letters are rotated. Other ciphers such as digraph substitution are even less intelligible.
No Linguistic Meaning.
In the case a cipher is chosen such that the cipher text is pronounceable, they wouldn't necessarily be words with a linguistic meaning. For example, while pronounceable, the following cipher text is gibberish:
malveS IBEr OLma ScriANg BOAGern EYmpGREn ToR nUmialaM
Pronounceable Codes are Cryptolects
While the warlock would be able to technically read and pronounce the words, they would be unintelligible.
The ability does not now endow the possessor with the ability to
understand codes. Even if the spell was not strictly a cipher, but a cryptolect analogous to thieve's cant or irish traveller's language, it would still be unintelligible.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read all writing. That doesn't mean you understand a secret code being delivered by that writing. For example, you might read, "Sunset Dog Potato," and have no idea that's code for something. #DnD
Reading & Casting Clarification by JC
Jeremy Crawford answered a related question about casting in this thread.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any. #DnD
answered Aug 9 at 18:54
Grosscol
3,836633
My question addresses this, and one of the links I posted on my question leads to that same quote as a reference. Crawford states you cannot cast a spell. He does not say whether or not you can read it. Just because you can read it and understand it does not mean you can cast a spell, and he said you just can't cast it. But can you read it?
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:21
-Crawford: "Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any." -Person: "so does that mean they could read spell scrolls and cast with the normal DC for spell scroll castings?!"-Crawford: "Nope"
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:22
1
The "if any" is an important part I think. Many ciphers don't have linguistic meaning.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:31
1
Generally, cipher text cannot even be read. Do you think it would be useful to add examples of ciphers to the answer?
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:55
1
@DanielZastoupil that is a very succinct way of summarizing it. I'll add that to the answer.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 20:09
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
12
down vote
up vote
12
down vote
No. Eyes of the Rune Keeper Does Not Read Spells.
tl;dr "Generally, you would not know anything about a scroll, even if you can read every language. Scrolls don't use a language." – Daniel Zastoupil
In short, the words (if any) could be understood in a literal sense, but that doesn't get the meaning nor substance of the spell. Spells, such as those on scrolls, don't have linguistic meaning. They are a cipher.
A spell scroll bears the words of a single spell, written in a mystical cipher.
Ciphers are (generally) not pronounceable.
An example simple cipher using rot-13 of "i am a cipher" has the cipher text:
v nz n pvcure
There is no meaningful pronunciation once the letters are rotated. Other ciphers such as digraph substitution are even less intelligible.
No Linguistic Meaning.
In the case a cipher is chosen such that the cipher text is pronounceable, they wouldn't necessarily be words with a linguistic meaning. For example, while pronounceable, the following cipher text is gibberish:
malveS IBEr OLma ScriANg BOAGern EYmpGREn ToR nUmialaM
Pronounceable Codes are Cryptolects
While the warlock would be able to technically read and pronounce the words, they would be unintelligible.
The ability does not now endow the possessor with the ability to
understand codes. Even if the spell was not strictly a cipher, but a cryptolect analogous to thieve's cant or irish traveller's language, it would still be unintelligible.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read all writing. That doesn't mean you understand a secret code being delivered by that writing. For example, you might read, "Sunset Dog Potato," and have no idea that's code for something. #DnD
Reading & Casting Clarification by JC
Jeremy Crawford answered a related question about casting in this thread.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any. #DnD
answered Aug 9 at 18:54
Grosscol
3,836633
No. Eyes of the Rune Keeper Does Not Read Spells.
tl;dr "Generally, you would not know anything about a scroll, even if you can read every language. Scrolls don't use a language." – Daniel Zastoupil
In short, the words (if any) could be understood in a literal sense, but that doesn't get the meaning nor substance of the spell. Spells, such as those on scrolls, don't have linguistic meaning. They are a cipher.
A spell scroll bears the words of a single spell, written in a mystical cipher.
Ciphers are (generally) not pronounceable.
An example simple cipher using rot-13 of "i am a cipher" has the cipher text:
v nz n pvcure
There is no meaningful pronunciation once the letters are rotated. Other ciphers such as digraph substitution are even less intelligible.
No Linguistic Meaning.
In the case a cipher is chosen such that the cipher text is pronounceable, they wouldn't necessarily be words with a linguistic meaning. For example, while pronounceable, the following cipher text is gibberish:
malveS IBEr OLma ScriANg BOAGern EYmpGREn ToR nUmialaM
Pronounceable Codes are Cryptolects
While the warlock would be able to technically read and pronounce the words, they would be unintelligible.
The ability does not now endow the possessor with the ability to
understand codes. Even if the spell was not strictly a cipher, but a cryptolect analogous to thieve's cant or irish traveller's language, it would still be unintelligible.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read all writing. That doesn't mean you understand a secret code being delivered by that writing. For example, you might read, "Sunset Dog Potato," and have no idea that's code for something. #DnD
Reading & Casting Clarification by JC
Jeremy Crawford answered a related question about casting in this thread.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any. #DnD
answered Aug 9 at 18:54
Grosscol
3,836633
edited Aug 9 at 20:08
answered Aug 9 at 18:54
Grosscol
3,836633
answered Aug 9 at 18:54
Grosscol
3,836633
answered Aug 9 at 18:54
Grosscol
3,836633
3,836633
My question addresses this, and one of the links I posted on my question leads to that same quote as a reference. Crawford states you cannot cast a spell. He does not say whether or not you can read it. Just because you can read it and understand it does not mean you can cast a spell, and he said you just can't cast it. But can you read it?
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:21
-Crawford: "Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any." -Person: "so does that mean they could read spell scrolls and cast with the normal DC for spell scroll castings?!"-Crawford: "Nope"
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:22
1
The "if any" is an important part I think. Many ciphers don't have linguistic meaning.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:31
1
Generally, cipher text cannot even be read. Do you think it would be useful to add examples of ciphers to the answer?
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:55
1
@DanielZastoupil that is a very succinct way of summarizing it. I'll add that to the answer.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 20:09
 |Â
show 2 more comments
My question addresses this, and one of the links I posted on my question leads to that same quote as a reference. Crawford states you cannot cast a spell. He does not say whether or not you can read it. Just because you can read it and understand it does not mean you can cast a spell, and he said you just can't cast it. But can you read it?
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:21
-Crawford: "Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any." -Person: "so does that mean they could read spell scrolls and cast with the normal DC for spell scroll castings?!"-Crawford: "Nope"
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:22
1
The "if any" is an important part I think. Many ciphers don't have linguistic meaning.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:31
1
Generally, cipher text cannot even be read. Do you think it would be useful to add examples of ciphers to the answer?
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:55
1
@DanielZastoupil that is a very succinct way of summarizing it. I'll add that to the answer.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 20:09
My question addresses this, and one of the links I posted on my question leads to that same quote as a reference. Crawford states you cannot cast a spell. He does not say whether or not you can read it. Just because you can read it and understand it does not mean you can cast a spell, and he said you just can't cast it. But can you read it?
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:21
My question addresses this, and one of the links I posted on my question leads to that same quote as a reference. Crawford states you cannot cast a spell. He does not say whether or not you can read it. Just because you can read it and understand it does not mean you can cast a spell, and he said you just can't cast it. But can you read it?
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:21
-Crawford: "Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any." -Person: "so does that mean they could read spell scrolls and cast with the normal DC for spell scroll castings?!"-Crawford: "Nope"
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:22
-Crawford: "Eyes of the Rune Keeper lets you read any form of writing, including the linguistic meaning of a rune, if any." -Person: "so does that mean they could read spell scrolls and cast with the normal DC for spell scroll castings?!"-Crawford: "Nope"
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:22
1
1
The "if any" is an important part I think. Many ciphers don't have linguistic meaning.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:31
The "if any" is an important part I think. Many ciphers don't have linguistic meaning.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:31
1
1
Generally, cipher text cannot even be read. Do you think it would be useful to add examples of ciphers to the answer?
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:55
Generally, cipher text cannot even be read. Do you think it would be useful to add examples of ciphers to the answer?
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 19:55
1
1
@DanielZastoupil that is a very succinct way of summarizing it. I'll add that to the answer.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 20:09
@DanielZastoupil that is a very succinct way of summarizing it. I'll add that to the answer.
– Grosscol
Aug 9 at 20:09
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
The ability states that "You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning." The magical properties of a spell scroll have nothing to do with its linguistic meaning, so simply being able to read the words on the scroll does not allow you to bypass class requirements for casting spells and the like. You could probably still read the literal words on a spell scroll, you just won't know how to use them to cast the spell. And of course, this is all assuming that the scroll is even written using words with linguistic meanings, which is not necessarily the case.
answered Aug 9 at 18:52
Ryan Thompson
1,973532
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
The ability states that "You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning." The magical properties of a spell scroll have nothing to do with its linguistic meaning, so simply being able to read the words on the scroll does not allow you to bypass class requirements for casting spells and the like. You could probably still read the literal words on a spell scroll, you just won't know how to use them to cast the spell. And of course, this is all assuming that the scroll is even written using words with linguistic meanings, which is not necessarily the case.
answered Aug 9 at 18:52
Ryan Thompson
1,973532
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
The ability states that "You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning." The magical properties of a spell scroll have nothing to do with its linguistic meaning, so simply being able to read the words on the scroll does not allow you to bypass class requirements for casting spells and the like. You could probably still read the literal words on a spell scroll, you just won't know how to use them to cast the spell. And of course, this is all assuming that the scroll is even written using words with linguistic meanings, which is not necessarily the case.
answered Aug 9 at 18:52
Ryan Thompson
1,973532
The ability states that "You can comprehend any written word or symbol, should it hold any linguistic meaning." The magical properties of a spell scroll have nothing to do with its linguistic meaning, so simply being able to read the words on the scroll does not allow you to bypass class requirements for casting spells and the like. You could probably still read the literal words on a spell scroll, you just won't know how to use them to cast the spell. And of course, this is all assuming that the scroll is even written using words with linguistic meanings, which is not necessarily the case.
answered Aug 9 at 18:52
Ryan Thompson
1,973532
edited Aug 9 at 19:20
answered Aug 9 at 18:52
Ryan Thompson
1,973532
answered Aug 9 at 18:52
Ryan Thompson
1,973532
answered Aug 9 at 18:52
Ryan Thompson
1,973532
1,973532
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f129292%2fwhat-would-a-warlock-understand-from-written-spells-outside-of-their-class-via%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
What are you trying to accomplish by simply reading a spell scroll if not to cast it? Are you hoping to be able to read and know what the spell is? Or some other reason?
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:25
@Rubiksmoose I think it would be very valuable for a merchant/archeologist to know how to read every magical spell in the world. But specifically, I want to combine it with The Book of Ancient Secrets to search out rituals to gather.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:27
my intent was not to imply that it wasn't enough, but to clarify if that was indeed what you wanted to do / meant by "read". So it is correct that you are primarily interested in reading the scroll to discover what the spell is on it then? If so, you should edit it into your question as you never actually state that.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:29
@Rubiksmoose Correct, I edited my question to address this explicitly.
– Daniel Zastoupil
Aug 9 at 19:30
2
I made an edit to emphasize the question by integrating your related questions into your text and moving the remaining ones to the bottom. I think this improves readability, but if you dislike it feel free to revert it. Generally, there is no need to cite related questions that you don't specifically reference in your question itself though there is nothing wrong with it.
– Rubiksmoose
Aug 9 at 19:49