Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RealAlHazred" data-source="post: 6749973" data-attributes="member: 25818">Originally posted by Xanchairothoss:"A standalone Masters of Artifice module could serve so many potential purposes"Not interested. Personally."I'd also like to apologize for my tone today - I've been having a really, really rough week, and upon a re-read, it seems I was being more than a little dickish, which you don't deserve."FWIW I didn't get that read from you at all (dickishness)."Perhaps due to the immense limits on my time, when I get an idea, my first thought is always "Is this idea necessary?". If something is close enough that a bit of reflavoring handles it, then I don't need to redesign it, or can re-imagine my idea as a tweak to an existing rule."That pretty much sums up part of my inherent philosophy per supplemental material, post core books. So thumbs up!"Don't get me wrong - by no means do I think this is unworthy. I just think that if the project can't solve problems like this early, it's going to have bigger problems later on. That, combined with the same philosophy behind Rip Me A New One, should explain why I sound pessimistic."It's apparent that it's more of a time thing, than anything else. If you're busy, rest assured that I did scrutinize the hell out of your build. There's not much wrong with it, at all, mechanically speaking. As an aside, I'm not a fan of the Artificer class as a concept to begin with (I thought I'd dabble in a rough for a cognitive exercise, but even my proposed rough I wouldn't introduce to any sort of game, outside of the intent to test it; unnecessary now, as you already did the leg-work on many of the issues that would've come up).1. It has to be playable with standard 5e assumptions about magic items (the rest is unnecessary addendum as all future settings are dependent upon this supposition; if they aren't that will be clearly stated, unless the designers are sloppy, in which case they won't sell books).2. It has to feel like the original artificer. <--- ie. it has to fulfill the inherent trope, which in this case is ability to rapidly craft magic items. Anything alse can be erased, short of particular edition aspects that were popular (hard metric to incorporate, but easy if you have a forum with threads dedicated to such to pull your market research from).3. It has to be at least as simple to play as 5e's spellcasters, and presentable without an incredible amount of text. (I would propably include "it has to be fun, accessible, and open to creative flexing".)Have you achieved these 3? Yes. Move on. Congratulations <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />"my idea was to use an analogous system to domains to attach appropriate divine influence to thematic characters"That sounds brilliant.</blockquote>

Verification