One of my players is running an Artificer and has just reached level 2. Reading the infusion rules we are both a little confused as they seem to contradict.
Infusing an Item Whenever you finish a long rest, you can touch a nonmagical object and imbue it with one of your artificer infusions, turning it into a magic item. An infusion works on only certain kinds of objects, as specified in the infusion’s description. If the item requires attunement, you can attune yourself to it the instant you infuse the item. If you decide to attune to the item later, you must do so using the normal process for attunement (see the attunement rules in the Dungeon Master’s Guide).
Your infusion remains in an item indefinitely, but when you die, the infusion vanishes after a number of days equal to your Intelligence modifier (minimum of 1 day). The infusion also vanishes if you replace your knowledge of the infusion.
You can infuse more than one nonmagical object at the end of a long rest; the maximum number of objects appears in the Infused Items column of the Artificer table. You must touch each of the objects, and each of your infusions can be in only one object at a time. Moreover, no object can bear more than one of your infusions at a time. If you try to exceed your maximum number of infusions, the oldest infusion ends, and then the new infusion applies.
If an infusion ends on an item that contains other things, like a bag of holding, its contents harmlessly appear in and around its space.
My question is this, the fact that Infusions last indefinitely until either the Artificer dies, places the same infusion on a different item, or loses the knowledge of that infusion I take to mean that over time an artificer can have every infusion running on multiple items.
For instance the artificer knows 6 infusions, day 1 he casts 1 and 2 on his armour and a weapon, day 2 he casts 3 and 4 on a different party members equipment and day 3 he casts the final 2 on a different party member. Is this the right application of the rules, to me it makes sense otherwise what is the point of having a class that makes magic items?
I would assume the answer is ‘no’ but I wanted to check.
It feels very odd to be able to replicate (up to) 4 magic items at level 2, but only ever be able to use two of them at a time at that level, because it just saves you a bit of money early on, Or, for example, if you replicate a bag of holding, you can only ever have one other infusion active.
I have seen a few people claim that the replicate magic item infusion does not count against the standard 2 max infusions (at level 2). Just that you are limited to having only 1 replica of your chosen magic item at any one time. The claim is that (TCOE p12) the reference to an ‘infusion ending on a bag of holding’ is only applied if you attempt to make a new bag of holding, but I wanted to ask what other’s thought
I like this second option better, as it means you can play more with your enhancement infusions and so that if you ever want to change your other infusions, you don’t have to constantly pick up every item that pops out of your bag of holding (since it would be the oldest infusion every other time, you would have to re-create the infusion and put everything back into the bag)
The problem is quite simple: I want to attune to four or more magical items at once, and I don’t want to take ten levels in Artificer.
Are there any features, items, etc. that increase the number of items you can attune to without being a 10th level or higher artificer?
I’m trying to figure out in D&D 5e if an Artificer, choosing armorer and guardian, can add their intelligence modifier to attack and damage rolls with their off-hand gauntlet.
Each model includes a special weapon. When you attack with that weapon, you can add your Intelligence modifier to the attack and damage rolls.
Each of the armor’s gauntlets.
Would the off-hand gauntlet be considered a part of the special weapon mentioned in the first quote to gain the bonus?
From Tasha’s Guide to Everything
Thunder Gauntlets. Each of the armor’s gauntlets counts as a simple melee weapon while you aren’t holding anything in it, and it deals 1d8 thunder damage on a hit.
Is this supposed to deal 1d8+STR damage?
Just how creative should the DM let the Artificer be? One of my players is a guy who thinks way too hard on how to solve problems he’s not meant to ‘Solve’ as a player.
For example, I have a little set-piece in place for my campaign setting where there are roaming clouds of illusion magic that will appear at random times around the region. These clouds effectively have the magical power of 9th-level illusion magic violently swirling within them, causing all kinds of chaos when they appear.
They are meant to be a hazard that the players are meant to avoid, but my Artificer player thinks differently. He surmises that with all his tool proficiencies like Smith’s tools, Tinker’s tools, Alchemy supplies, etc., that he should be able to build any kind of contraption he wants given time. I tried to explain that doing so would grind the game to a halt, as he would need to study for years in game time to come close to building the ‘giant magical vacuum’ that can suck up the illusion storms, and he wouldn’t even be able to determine whether it would work or not.
This is only one of many hypothetical arguements we’ve had in the past, and I would just like a reference to point to in the future if he ever picks to play Artificer again:
Exactly how much of the hypothetical creativity should be allowed to actually happen when a player uses meta knowledge to build machines in a D&D setting? What power do artisan’s tools actually have in the hands of an Artificer?
Considering a 14th level artificer with the Metamagic Adept feat in D&D 5e:
- I’m assuming that the feat does not grant the ability to restore sorcery points by expending spell slots (since it doesn’t grant the Flexible Casting feature)
- It seems to me that an artificer could use the Bloodwell Vial to regain the sorcery points when they roll a Hit Dice, but they would only regain 2 (since that’s their maximum amount)
- Are there other items/ways to regain expended points?
So in my understanding eldritch cannons can be created during a battle with an action. The first one of the day doesn’t require expending a slot.
But what about activation and movement during a battle? Can you activate and move all cannons during bonus action?
I’m interested in building an artificer who has a defender-y bent; still an artificer, still a leader, but with a minor in defending. I’m fine with sacrificing some Leadership for Defense; I expect that has to happen, but those are my priorities. What is the best way to do this?
The way I imagine this is a tanky sort of artificer, who makes the area near him either suck for enemies to be in or awesome for allies to be in. He doesn’t necessarily have to draw or take fire personally, I just like the idea of being “in the mix” and creating a sort of “soft zone defense” for my allies.
I’m fairly-new to 4e, and my limited experience is quite old (before Essentials came out, but I want to say it was the within a year of its release). I’m also more than willing to do my homework, and the game is with an experienced DM and a bunch of fairly-new players, so I think that may work out.
The game will start at 1st, but I’m interested in builds and ideas that go all the way to 30. Part of this is information-gathering about the system itself, so even information like “well, this doesn’t really do anything defender-y until Epic, but whoo-boy, when you get there!” will be useful and interesting to me. All material is good, no houserules (yet, anyway, game is still very much in planning stages).
The suggestions that I’ve seen for this in my googling include…
Summoner artificer. Consensus seemed to be “it works, but summoning will eat up all your actions and make it hard for you to do the leader thing, and you’ll be a decidedly sub-par defender.” Conceptually, not exactly what I wanted out of the artificer anyway; not strictly opposed, but I’d be happy to learn there’s a better way.
Artificer|swordmage. This was just a mention in a couple of different threads, but they were explicitly veterans wanting some “weird/fun defenders.” The reaction there seemed positive, with swordmages cited as “some of the best hybrids […] because they lose so very little with hybriding,” but no details were given and my general understanding is that hybrid is almost always a bad idea, which makes me leery. Conceptually, though, this sounds like exactly what I want.
I doubt these are the only ways to make this idea. I’ve tagged this multi-classing because I figure dipping into another role in 4e is similar to multiclassing in other systems, but I’m not particularly invested in necessarily having a multiclass feat or hybridizing or whatever; those are just how I imagine it will happen.
The Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything brings the most recent version of the Artificer and the Battle Smith subclass, who gains a companion called Steel Defender at level 3. In the description of the Steel Defender ability, there is a part of the text that states:
[…] In combat, the defender shares your initiative coutn, but it takes its turn immediately after yours. It can move and use its reaction on its own, but the only action it takes on its turn is the Dodge action, unless you take a bonus action on your turn to command it to take an action. […]
Altought it states that you have to take an bonus action on your turn to command it to take an action, there is no limitation regarding the distance between the two. Since nothing restricts regarding this condition, by RAW you could command it whenever you are by taking a bonus action. But this sounds off in some cases, like when they are really far apart from each other (miles away for example).
Is there any other official rules that could be used to support a maximum distance between then for the artificer be able to command it?