Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
WotC Survey Result: Classes OK, Eberron Needs Work
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 7669224" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>I think since you're calling it an Artificer, and not a Wizard, it should definitely look more like the former than the latter. That doesn't mean it's not also the latter.</p><p></p><p>I don't agree that spellcasting is the Wizard's entire cake, any more than it's the sorcerer's entire cake or the cleric's entire cake or the bard's entire cake. Wizards are not just one-trick ponies, and reducing their spellcasting isn't any more dramatic than subtracting expertise dice from fighters or adding spellcasting to rogues (or removing spells from rangers). </p><p></p><p>Using <em>magic through knowledge</em> is part of the wizard's identity, and it's part of the artificer's identity, too. They both use magic and they are both trained to know how magic works. Artificers use items that have it, wizards cast spells from memory, but they're both defined to a large extent by their magic. An artificer who didn't make magic items wouldn't be an artificer - she's not defined by her magic at that point. A fighter who forged a magic sword blessed by the gods wouldn't be an artificer - he hasn't got the magical knowledge, he's just special. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No sneak attack, no cunning action, no mage hand tricks...a class is more than its list of spells. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It's a lot more than that. A Wizard is distinct from a Sorcerer because the Wizard masters magic through training and specialization, while a Sorcerer masters magic through self-confidence and control. The spellbook and schools are one reflection of how training and specialization can look, and metamagic and a list of spells known are one reflection of how magic through self-confidence and control can look. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>To me, without anything more robust, that just looks like knowledge and specialization by another name. Nothing is stopping me form playing a wizard tomorrow that is Iron Man - hell, a dwarf abjurer gets most of the way there without even a cosmetic refluff. And then if instead of "preparing spells in my mind" I say I am "preparing infusions in my wands" well, who is going to stop me? </p><p></p><p>As always, not saying that an artificer <em>can't</em> be a new class, or a subset of some other class, I'm just questioning the thought process that says they should be because of their proficiencies or their take on spellcasting.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 7669224, member: 2067"] I think since you're calling it an Artificer, and not a Wizard, it should definitely look more like the former than the latter. That doesn't mean it's not also the latter. I don't agree that spellcasting is the Wizard's entire cake, any more than it's the sorcerer's entire cake or the cleric's entire cake or the bard's entire cake. Wizards are not just one-trick ponies, and reducing their spellcasting isn't any more dramatic than subtracting expertise dice from fighters or adding spellcasting to rogues (or removing spells from rangers). Using [I]magic through knowledge[/I] is part of the wizard's identity, and it's part of the artificer's identity, too. They both use magic and they are both trained to know how magic works. Artificers use items that have it, wizards cast spells from memory, but they're both defined to a large extent by their magic. An artificer who didn't make magic items wouldn't be an artificer - she's not defined by her magic at that point. A fighter who forged a magic sword blessed by the gods wouldn't be an artificer - he hasn't got the magical knowledge, he's just special. No sneak attack, no cunning action, no mage hand tricks...a class is more than its list of spells. It's a lot more than that. A Wizard is distinct from a Sorcerer because the Wizard masters magic through training and specialization, while a Sorcerer masters magic through self-confidence and control. The spellbook and schools are one reflection of how training and specialization can look, and metamagic and a list of spells known are one reflection of how magic through self-confidence and control can look. To me, without anything more robust, that just looks like knowledge and specialization by another name. Nothing is stopping me form playing a wizard tomorrow that is Iron Man - hell, a dwarf abjurer gets most of the way there without even a cosmetic refluff. And then if instead of "preparing spells in my mind" I say I am "preparing infusions in my wands" well, who is going to stop me? As always, not saying that an artificer [I]can't[/I] be a new class, or a subset of some other class, I'm just questioning the thought process that says they should be because of their proficiencies or their take on spellcasting. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
WotC Survey Result: Classes OK, Eberron Needs Work
Top