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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Running Eberron in 5E
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: 6466525" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>Sure. To further pin down my meaning: it's a question of scale. Lets use proficiencies as an example.</p><p></p><p>Folks have said that artificers are distinct from wizards because they use medium armor and simple weapons and have skills like pick locks and disable traps (in 5e, this would be thieves' tools). </p><p></p><p>I say that this does not do enough to make artificers distinct from wizards. As support, I showed that a subclass in the PHB can add a proficiency (or several). So, if the goal is simply to replicate what a 3e/e artificer could do, the artificer can be a subclass and have those proficiencies. If the goal is to make the artificer an independent class, the artificer must have more to distinguish it than those proficiencies. "I think otherwise" is fine, but it isn't much of a reason for anyone to agree with you.</p><p></p><p>The current convo is more about infusions and crafting. Folks have said that making magic items that house spells is something that is distinctive from what wizards do.</p><p></p><p>I say that this does not do enough to make artificers distinct from wizards. As support, I showed that the difference between "I prepare and cast <em>fireball</em>" and "I make a bomb that explodes using the mechanics of <em>fireball</em>" largely boil down to whose action triggers the effect. Meanwhile, other classes that can use <em>fireball</em> (such as sorcerers and sun clerics) have additional mechanics that make them stand apart from each other. If the goal is to simply replicate what the 3e/4e artificer could do, the artificer can be a subclass and prepare spells in items that others can trigger. If the goal is to make the artificer an independent class, they must have more to distinguish it than letting allies trigger their spells. "I think otherwise" is fine, but it isn't much of a reason for anyone to agree with you.</p><p></p><p>Earlier, people said that subclasses based on creating certain items could support the class. I argued that the proposed subclasses seemed a little arbitrary. Someone came in and had the brilliant idea of using artificer PrC's as a basis for subclasses. I'm on board with that. </p><p></p><p>Recently, [MENTION=7989]Wrathamon[/MENTION] proposed an alternate item crafting system perhaps with different "rider effects" that artificers could choose. That sounds like it has some meat, too. </p><p></p><p>I can totally see an artificer class condensing out of that cloud of vaporous hypothetical mechanics. </p><p></p><p>But notably, both expand the mechanical place of an artificer beyond an armor-wearing, club-wielding, trap-disarming wizard who lets others trigger their spells. Warlocks and sorcerers both won their independence from wizards in a similar fashion: their mechanics are more than "I am a blood wizard who uses spontaneous casting and a spear" or "I am a sword-wielding wizard whose magic spells are gifts from beyond this world." Meanwhile, assassins couldn't jump away from rogues because they couldn't get a unique enough head of steam, and swordmages are a kind of fighter now because "I am a fighter who casts spells" is not big enough to leave a subclass.</p><p></p><p>So there is a distinct mechanical scope that a class needs to achieve in 5e to be an independent class. It needs to earn its large decision point. The concept of an artificer certainly can earn that (any concept could), but it needs big mechanics to back that up if it wants that. A slightly different proficiency load-out and letting your allies trigger your spells don't fly high enough.,</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 6466525, member: 2067"] Sure. To further pin down my meaning: it's a question of scale. Lets use proficiencies as an example. Folks have said that artificers are distinct from wizards because they use medium armor and simple weapons and have skills like pick locks and disable traps (in 5e, this would be thieves' tools). I say that this does not do enough to make artificers distinct from wizards. As support, I showed that a subclass in the PHB can add a proficiency (or several). So, if the goal is simply to replicate what a 3e/e artificer could do, the artificer can be a subclass and have those proficiencies. If the goal is to make the artificer an independent class, the artificer must have more to distinguish it than those proficiencies. "I think otherwise" is fine, but it isn't much of a reason for anyone to agree with you. The current convo is more about infusions and crafting. Folks have said that making magic items that house spells is something that is distinctive from what wizards do. I say that this does not do enough to make artificers distinct from wizards. As support, I showed that the difference between "I prepare and cast [I]fireball[/I]" and "I make a bomb that explodes using the mechanics of [I]fireball[/I]" largely boil down to whose action triggers the effect. Meanwhile, other classes that can use [I]fireball[/I] (such as sorcerers and sun clerics) have additional mechanics that make them stand apart from each other. If the goal is to simply replicate what the 3e/4e artificer could do, the artificer can be a subclass and prepare spells in items that others can trigger. If the goal is to make the artificer an independent class, they must have more to distinguish it than letting allies trigger their spells. "I think otherwise" is fine, but it isn't much of a reason for anyone to agree with you. Earlier, people said that subclasses based on creating certain items could support the class. I argued that the proposed subclasses seemed a little arbitrary. Someone came in and had the brilliant idea of using artificer PrC's as a basis for subclasses. I'm on board with that. Recently, [MENTION=7989]Wrathamon[/MENTION] proposed an alternate item crafting system perhaps with different "rider effects" that artificers could choose. That sounds like it has some meat, too. I can totally see an artificer class condensing out of that cloud of vaporous hypothetical mechanics. But notably, both expand the mechanical place of an artificer beyond an armor-wearing, club-wielding, trap-disarming wizard who lets others trigger their spells. Warlocks and sorcerers both won their independence from wizards in a similar fashion: their mechanics are more than "I am a blood wizard who uses spontaneous casting and a spear" or "I am a sword-wielding wizard whose magic spells are gifts from beyond this world." Meanwhile, assassins couldn't jump away from rogues because they couldn't get a unique enough head of steam, and swordmages are a kind of fighter now because "I am a fighter who casts spells" is not big enough to leave a subclass. So there is a distinct mechanical scope that a class needs to achieve in 5e to be an independent class. It needs to earn its large decision point. The concept of an artificer certainly can earn that (any concept could), but it needs big mechanics to back that up if it wants that. A slightly different proficiency load-out and letting your allies trigger your spells don't fly high enough., [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Running Eberron in 5E
Top