I think the Title says it all: Would you allow tattoos on the Iron Defender? I think Spellwrought Tattoo could be a great adition to an Iron Defender - be it some kind of lvl 1 blast spell, or things like Jump that give it more Mobility or even just something like Shield of Faith that would boost that abismal AC of the tanky pet.
I myself woul argue that you'd have to reflavor it as something other than a classical tattoo but it should be fine balance wise (as long as you don't abuse the whole "I give a famliar to everybody" thing or something similar)
I think the Title says it all: Would you allow tattoos on the Iron Defender? I think Spellwrought Tattoo could be a great adition to an Iron Defender - be it some kind of lvl 1 blast spell, or things like Jump that give it more Mobility or even just something like Shield of Faith that would boost that abismal AC of the tanky pet.
I myself woul argue that you'd have to reflavor it as something other than a classical tattoo but it should be fine balance wise (as long as you don't abuse the whole "I give a famliar to everybody" thing or something similar)
I agree with Stoutstein - the languages block saying "understands" implies neither SDs nor Homunculi can speak, so without a houserule upgrading them to speak, they can't utter command words. Contrast with Pact of the Chain Warlocks, who unequivocally can achieve a familiar that can speak, so you could infuse a Spellwrought Tattoo on your Chainlock's Imp and the Imp would be able to use it (don't forget to give the Imp a little purse to carry the needle!), potentially, yes, resulting in the Warlock's Imp familiar having its own Owl familiar.
Where things get concerning is that the Find Familiar spell can summon a Raven, which has an ability, Mimicry, that may or may not work for command words, especially if your GM is familiar with how good real-world ravens are at human speech. If your GM declares ravens can utter command words, you can keep infusing that tattoo until the party has a murder of raven familiars, each one the familiar of its predecessor raven. I'm not sure how useful this... Familiarception will be, but it'd sure be a headache to keep track of in combat.
I would (personally) not expect a DM to allow tattoos as infusions, so by extension I wouldn't expect this combo to be allowed. However, if a DM was willing to go with tattoo infusions, they might also be willing to let steel defenders use the tattoos.
The SWT will probably be one the new mandatory session zero topics as it has some many implications. IMO as long as it's limited to one familiar total it's a pretty nice little infusion but not overshadowing anything.
I'd still take an unbreakable arrow just because spells are boring.
Yes, the two infusion issues I keep seeing crop up on here as things many GMs will want to ban are Spellwrought Tattoos and learning the same magic item infusion multiple times. Tasha's is wall-to-wall rules wackiness. Bear in mind Spellwrought Tattoos aren't the only consumable Common item you can infuse, they're just the most powerful, so your GM may want to rule on the others (uh.... that key that can eventually open any lock and then expires, that perfume that enhances charisma for an hour, and that cane that turns into a sword are the examples I can think of right now).
Yes, the two infusion issues I keep seeing crop up on here as things many GMs will want to ban are Spellwrought Tattoos and learning the same magic item infusion multiple times. Tasha's is wall-to-wall rules wackiness. Bear in mind Spellwrought Tattoos aren't the only consumable Common item you can infuse, they're just the most powerful, so your GM may want to rule on the others (uh.... that key that can eventually open any lock and then expires, that perfume that enhances charisma for an hour, and that cane that turns into a sword are the examples I can think of right now).
To be fair, in most cases, people assume those two things aren't allowed, and people argue about whether GMs should allow them.
I think the biggest issue with Spellwrought Tattoos is that there is no consistent system for crafting, thus no established guidance about just which tattoos someone could infuse. Only spells you know? Only spells from the artificer list? Only artificer spells you know? It's completely ambiguous.
Huh.. its weird that you can't tattoo someone else.
You can 100% tattoo someone else. That someone else will need to hold the needle against the tattoo and speak the command word to activate it, but there's no rule saying you can only tattoo yourself. Where things get weird is if you try to mix and match who's meeting the requirements for activation - e.g. if you try to have Alice hold the needle against Bob's tattoo and say the command word. The rules don't cover that situation.
I mean you aren't tattooing anyone else, if only the person being applied the magic item can say the word to apply said tatto.. you're just holding a magic needle they are holding and using.. To use it, it has to be used on the user. "you" is pretty specific in both cases below. "your skin" instead of "subjects skin" or some other 3rd party clause. I feel like they pretty soundly phrased it so only the user of the needle can recieve the tattoo..
Had to look that up before, because I wanted to put it on my Homonculus Servant. Which by wording the "speaking" issue comes in. (though the HS has the benefit that you can custom build its appearence any way you want.. . Meaning you can create it with lungs, voice box, etc. and it understands a language so there is a pretty decent arguement there is no reason you can't make one with speaking ability as nothing says you can't-while it does say you can determine its appearence any way you want). Unless of course your GM stats apperence doesn't count stuff like mouth and tongue, etc. My Gm was fine with it-because of the fact its such a fragile creature and if it dies I lose the needle and the pearl if its too far, rolls away, or we have to run away. But that is a GM determintation since appearence doesnt' count guts.
" To use the tattoo, you must hold the needle against your skin and speak the command word."
The SWT will probably be one the new mandatory session zero topics as it has some many implications. IMO as long as it's limited to one familiar total it's a pretty nice little infusion but not overshadowing anything.
I'd still take an unbreakable arrow just because spells are boring.
Yes, the two infusion issues I keep seeing crop up on here as things many GMs will want to ban are Spellwrought Tattoos and learning the same magic item infusion multiple times. Tasha's is wall-to-wall rules wackiness. Bear in mind Spellwrought Tattoos aren't the only consumable Common item you can infuse, they're just the most powerful, so your GM may want to rule on the others (uh.... that key that can eventually open any lock and then expires, that perfume that enhances charisma for an hour, and that cane that turns into a sword are the examples I can think of right now).
Probably the most powerful consumable common magic item outside of spellwrought tattoo multiple-familiar shenanigans is the Pot of Awakening. Granted it takes 30 days to grow a single awakened shrub with one so it's a long term investment as an infused item. But it does let you grow an army given enough time.
I don't think either the key that let's you open one lock and then vanishes (so once per day you'll use what is essentially a Knock spell in silent instead of the +a lot thievestools you'll have by lvl 6) nor the pot of awakening are "too powerful" neither are most common infusions. I see the "I give a familiar a day" problem, so that would be something I wouldn't be allowing. I don't hink any other of the first level spells you could put in a needle would be a problem, so I would tend to allow it. I also would have allowed the defender to use the needle before hearing the thing with the comand word, but I don't hink that would be too broken to allow. I really think that wouldn't be a problem in any game to let your Artificer tinker a bit.
Where things get concerning is that the Find Familiar spell can summon a Raven, which has an ability, Mimicry, that may or may not work for command words, especially if your GM is familiar with how good real-world ravens are at human speech. If your GM declares ravens can utter command words, you can keep infusing that tattoo until the party has a murder of raven familiars, each one the familiar of its predecessor raven. I'm not sure how useful this... Familiarception will be, but it'd sure be a headache to keep track of in combat.
What's the Wisdom stat on a spellwrought tattoo for determining if it sees through the mimicry? 😄
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I think the Title says it all: Would you allow tattoos on the Iron Defender? I think Spellwrought Tattoo could be a great adition to an Iron Defender - be it some kind of lvl 1 blast spell, or things like Jump that give it more Mobility or even just something like Shield of Faith that would boost that abismal AC of the tanky pet.
I myself woul argue that you'd have to reflavor it as something other than a classical tattoo but it should be fine balance wise (as long as you don't abuse the whole "I give a famliar to everybody" thing or something similar)
I wouldn't allow it, my most obvious reason for not allowing it is the fact the steel defender is a construct made out of metal or wood, and therefore doesn't have a skin the tattoo can be applied too, and even if it did I don't think it was ever intended for NPC companions gained through class features to be able to use/wield magical weapons or items.
Tattoo Attunement. To attune to this item, you hold the needle to your skin where you want the tattoo to appear, pressing the needle there throughout the attunement process. When the attunement is complete, the needle turns into the ink that becomes the tattoo, which appears on the skin. If your attunement to the tattoo ends, the tattoo vanishes, and the needle reappears in your space.
This is just my opinion but how I interpret the tattoo attunement text then no, unless a warforged had skin they wouldn't be able to attune to magical tattoos.
But even then warforged are living beings, defenders are constructs and artificial in nature. To qualify to use magical items requires a certain degree of autonomy and sentience in my mind, especially for magical items requiring attunement.
So this might be the rebel in me, but could you use Magical Tinkering to give a pebble the 'command word' and have the HS or SD use that pebble? ("Whenever tapped by a creature, the object emits a recorded message that can be heard up to 10 feet away.") This would be of course if the DM allowed Warforged to use the tattoos seeings how they dont have vocal cords but can still use Verbal spell casting which is based on Pitch and frequency so that could definitely be recorded :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think the Title says it all: Would you allow tattoos on the Iron Defender? I think Spellwrought Tattoo could be a great adition to an Iron Defender - be it some kind of lvl 1 blast spell, or things like Jump that give it more Mobility or even just something like Shield of Faith that would boost that abismal AC of the tanky pet.
I myself woul argue that you'd have to reflavor it as something other than a classical tattoo but it should be fine balance wise (as long as you don't abuse the whole "I give a famliar to everybody" thing or something similar)
I agree with Stoutstein - the languages block saying "understands" implies neither SDs nor Homunculi can speak, so without a houserule upgrading them to speak, they can't utter command words. Contrast with Pact of the Chain Warlocks, who unequivocally can achieve a familiar that can speak, so you could infuse a Spellwrought Tattoo on your Chainlock's Imp and the Imp would be able to use it (don't forget to give the Imp a little purse to carry the needle!), potentially, yes, resulting in the Warlock's Imp familiar having its own Owl familiar.
Where things get concerning is that the Find Familiar spell can summon a Raven, which has an ability, Mimicry, that may or may not work for command words, especially if your GM is familiar with how good real-world ravens are at human speech. If your GM declares ravens can utter command words, you can keep infusing that tattoo until the party has a murder of raven familiars, each one the familiar of its predecessor raven. I'm not sure how useful this... Familiarception will be, but it'd sure be a headache to keep track of in combat.
I would (personally) not expect a DM to allow tattoos as infusions, so by extension I wouldn't expect this combo to be allowed. However, if a DM was willing to go with tattoo infusions, they might also be willing to let steel defenders use the tattoos.
Yes, the two infusion issues I keep seeing crop up on here as things many GMs will want to ban are Spellwrought Tattoos and learning the same magic item infusion multiple times. Tasha's is wall-to-wall rules wackiness. Bear in mind Spellwrought Tattoos aren't the only consumable Common item you can infuse, they're just the most powerful, so your GM may want to rule on the others (uh.... that key that can eventually open any lock and then expires, that perfume that enhances charisma for an hour, and that cane that turns into a sword are the examples I can think of right now).
Huh.. its weird that you can't tattoo someone else.
To be fair, in most cases, people assume those two things aren't allowed, and people argue about whether GMs should allow them.
I think the biggest issue with Spellwrought Tattoos is that there is no consistent system for crafting, thus no established guidance about just which tattoos someone could infuse. Only spells you know? Only spells from the artificer list? Only artificer spells you know? It's completely ambiguous.
You can 100% tattoo someone else. That someone else will need to hold the needle against the tattoo and speak the command word to activate it, but there's no rule saying you can only tattoo yourself. Where things get weird is if you try to mix and match who's meeting the requirements for activation - e.g. if you try to have Alice hold the needle against Bob's tattoo and say the command word. The rules don't cover that situation.
I mean you aren't tattooing anyone else, if only the person being applied the magic item can say the word to apply said tatto.. you're just holding a magic needle they are holding and using.. To use it, it has to be used on the user. "you" is pretty specific in both cases below. "your skin" instead of "subjects skin" or some other 3rd party clause. I feel like they pretty soundly phrased it so only the user of the needle can recieve the tattoo..
Had to look that up before, because I wanted to put it on my Homonculus Servant. Which by wording the "speaking" issue comes in. (though the HS has the benefit that you can custom build its appearence any way you want.. . Meaning you can create it with lungs, voice box, etc. and it understands a language so there is a pretty decent arguement there is no reason you can't make one with speaking ability as nothing says you can't-while it does say you can determine its appearence any way you want). Unless of course your GM stats apperence doesn't count stuff like mouth and tongue, etc. My Gm was fine with it-because of the fact its such a fragile creature and if it dies I lose the needle and the pearl if its too far, rolls away, or we have to run away. But that is a GM determintation since appearence doesnt' count guts.
" To use the tattoo, you must hold the needle against your skin and speak the command word."
Probably the most powerful consumable common magic item outside of spellwrought tattoo multiple-familiar shenanigans is the Pot of Awakening. Granted it takes 30 days to grow a single awakened shrub with one so it's a long term investment as an infused item. But it does let you grow an army given enough time.
I don't think either the key that let's you open one lock and then vanishes (so once per day you'll use what is essentially a Knock spell in silent instead of the +a lot thievestools you'll have by lvl 6) nor the pot of awakening are "too powerful" neither are most common infusions. I see the "I give a familiar a day" problem, so that would be something I wouldn't be allowing. I don't hink any other of the first level spells you could put in a needle would be a problem, so I would tend to allow it. I also would have allowed the defender to use the needle before hearing the thing with the comand word, but I don't hink that would be too broken to allow. I really think that wouldn't be a problem in any game to let your Artificer tinker a bit.
What's the Wisdom stat on a spellwrought tattoo for determining if it sees through the mimicry? 😄
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
It'd be great. Like when a Parrot and Alexa or Another pseudo AI voice command start talking
I wouldn't allow it, my most obvious reason for not allowing it is the fact the steel defender is a construct made out of metal or wood, and therefore doesn't have a skin the tattoo can be applied too, and even if it did I don't think it was ever intended for NPC companions gained through class features to be able to use/wield magical weapons or items.
This is just my opinion but how I interpret the tattoo attunement text then no, unless a warforged had skin they wouldn't be able to attune to magical tattoos.
But even then warforged are living beings, defenders are constructs and artificial in nature. To qualify to use magical items requires a certain degree of autonomy and sentience in my mind, especially for magical items requiring attunement.
So this might be the rebel in me, but could you use Magical Tinkering to give a pebble the 'command word' and have the HS or SD use that pebble? ("Whenever tapped by a creature, the object emits a recorded message that can be heard up to 10 feet away.") This would be of course if the DM allowed Warforged to use the tattoos seeings how they dont have vocal cords but can still use Verbal spell casting which is based on Pitch and frequency so that could definitely be recorded :)