Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 7029736" data-attributes="member: 6802951">I like to think that Miracle Max's cure took an hour to create, and was a chocolate-coated, 500gp diamond.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile    :-)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />But no, 'glowy' healing in D&D is not obligatory. If HP aren't necessarily meat, then Cure Wounds can look like nothing more than a helping hand and an encouraging word. Healing Word can be nothing more than a denigrating comment about the target giving up so easily that spurs them back into action. etc.As to the 'doing stuff without magic' bit, I think that that was an issue  from in the earlier editions before 3.x style multiclassing. It was easy to justify a mundane character not doing magical things, but harder to justify why a character who was able to cast spells couldn't also learn to do mundane things as well if they put the same effort in as the character who couldn't cast spells.In 5th ed, you can represent thing by multiclassing, but that wasn't an option in the early editions. Kinda sounds like a Bard as well. Or some versions of cleric. Or someone with White Raven and/or Devoted Spirit maneuvers from the Bo9S. etc. If we're allowing non-magical healing then we're accepting that magical healing can also mean nothing but a good pep-talk. At which point the difference becomes academic except in those rare cases when antimagic is involved, or whether an ability would go 'Ping!' under detect magic. Yep. I'm thinking that if you view infusions as slapping together a temporary device and removed the ability to spell cast normally, that wouldn't be a bad fit. Or you could even require the devices (infusions) to be assembled over a long rest, giving a games-mechanical effect almost similar to normal vancian spell preparation. Yep. If the DM allows magic-item creation, then the assumption is that she will allow Artificers to create items at least as well as most other spellcasters. I personally would have preferred the UA Artificer class' items to be as you say; temporary-with-upkeep similar to that rather than actual once-ever removable items.</blockquote>

Verification