Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Proficiencies don't make the class. Do they?
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: 6621377" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>It's a finer point. I think there, you need to be able to persuasively make the case that the character type is actually incompatible with the elements you're hoping to subtract. And it can be a hard case to make. </p><p></p><p>Like, if you proposed the artificer as a subclass of cleric or rogue or bard, this would probably come into play. Above and beyond the story/conceptual reasons (which might not even really apply to rogues or bards), you'd just need to subtract so much of the class's features that are not good for artificers - clerics without <em>turn undead</em>, rogues who can't hide using <em>cunning action</em>, bards who can't <em>countercharm</em>, etc. It's clearly not a comfortable fit.</p><p></p><p>But there's nothing incompatible with the concept of an artificer and a <s>spellbook</s> equipment manual (arguably, it makes MORE sense like this than with everything just being in their heads at all times). And the same applies to higher level spells - if artificers can craft things akin to the <em>well of many worlds</em> or <em>the ring of three wishes</em>, there's nothing incompatible with the idea that they can <s>cast</s> infuse <em>gate</em> or <em>wish</em> into an item. This is especially true if you're just going to give them these capabilities by the some other mechanic anyway.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, the case would need to be made that an artificer <em>cannot</em> have the spells a current wizard does in the way that they can't have <em>turn undead</em> or <em>sneak attack</em>. It's a harder case to make in the case of "I have this <s>book of spells</s> manual of little tweaks I can make to things to make them magical."</p><p></p><p>If artificers can infuse <em>magic missile</em> into a wand, then they can cast <em>magic missile</em>. If artificers can infuse <em>wish</em> into a ring, they can cast <em>wish</em>. In fact, one of my big issues is that making an item that can cast Spell X isn't very distinct in play from just casting Spell X (certainly not in the way that <em>smite</em> and <em>action surge</em> are distinct, for instance).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 6621377, member: 2067"] It's a finer point. I think there, you need to be able to persuasively make the case that the character type is actually incompatible with the elements you're hoping to subtract. And it can be a hard case to make. Like, if you proposed the artificer as a subclass of cleric or rogue or bard, this would probably come into play. Above and beyond the story/conceptual reasons (which might not even really apply to rogues or bards), you'd just need to subtract so much of the class's features that are not good for artificers - clerics without [I]turn undead[/I], rogues who can't hide using [I]cunning action[/I], bards who can't [I]countercharm[/I], etc. It's clearly not a comfortable fit. But there's nothing incompatible with the concept of an artificer and a [s]spellbook[/s] equipment manual (arguably, it makes MORE sense like this than with everything just being in their heads at all times). And the same applies to higher level spells - if artificers can craft things akin to the [I]well of many worlds[/I] or [I]the ring of three wishes[/I], there's nothing incompatible with the idea that they can [s]cast[/s] infuse [I]gate[/I] or [I]wish[/I] into an item. This is especially true if you're just going to give them these capabilities by the some other mechanic anyway. Yeah, the case would need to be made that an artificer [I]cannot[/I] have the spells a current wizard does in the way that they can't have [I]turn undead[/I] or [I]sneak attack[/I]. It's a harder case to make in the case of "I have this [s]book of spells[/s] manual of little tweaks I can make to things to make them magical." If artificers can infuse [I]magic missile[/I] into a wand, then they can cast [I]magic missile[/I]. If artificers can infuse [I]wish[/I] into a ring, they can cast [I]wish[/I]. In fact, one of my big issues is that making an item that can cast Spell X isn't very distinct in play from just casting Spell X (certainly not in the way that [I]smite[/I] and [I]action surge[/I] are distinct, for instance). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Proficiencies don't make the class. Do they?
Top