Why haven't they fixed the broken bits?

So, I created a Battle Smith, and there's an option to add the Steel Defender as an Extra -- in particular, I want it there as a Mount for the Rock Gnome Artificer. But, obviously, it won't add it, because you have to select a creature from the sourcebooks, which the Steel Defender is not. It's really annoying. I've read something about Extras only being creatures from sourcebooks and thus with static stat blocks, where the SD has a dynamic stat block, hence why it's under the Actions tab. But it's not rollable. So, you have to track it manually in an otherwise automated system.

Why not, if adding a dynamic stat block to Extras is too challenging, add the Steel Defender to the Inventory of the Artificer so it's to hit shows up with the Artificer's weapons? The SD is part of the Bonus Action anyway, those stats scale already with level and skill changes.

Problem solved, yeah?

Now, about Infusions and adding items.

Enhanced Defense allows you to apply that infusion to the Steel Defender. But, you can't make that selection in the current set up -- only armour that the Artificer may wear. Another lost ability to track the Steel Defender adequately.

Mind Sharpener allows you to apply that infusion to armour or robes, but robes are not equippable inventory and don't show up as an option from the choose item selector. Why not? It says it right there: armour or robes. 

Enhanced Arcane Focus is similar, allowing you to apply that infusion to rod, staff, or wand. But, rods and wands, while listed as arcane foci, are not equippable, so cannot be chosen, and staves, while both arcane foci and equippable, still do not show up as option from the choose item selector. Why not? It says it right there: rod, staff, or wand.

Additionally, EAF violates the Artificer's arcane focus criterion, which are artisan's tools, not rods, staves, or wands. What's up with that? Moreover, EAF allows, by its text, that an Artificer may turn any non-magical item into an EAF by using their actual arcane focus (tools) to craft the now *magical* arcane focus. So, for example, a pair of Tinker's goggles could easily serve as an EAF, and that's certainly more in keeping with the class aesthetic than rod, staff, or wand. So, why not?

Has anyone else noticed this? Are these going to be addressed?

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

Quote from SunIsGettingRealLow96589 >>

"Enhanced Defense does not allow applying the infusion to the Steel Defender; only armor or shields are allowed"

I think if my DM tried to enforce such a strict interpretation of the rules, i might start looking for a different DM.

Is it that strict? There’s nothing in the rules about putting an infusion directly in a creature; it has to be a non-magical object. It wouldn’t be a terrible house rule, but it seems weird to expect it to be allowed automatically.

It's not strict, but you could try to make the case for infusing Barding for the Steel Defender. I don't think there is anything restricting the Steel Defender (or your Wizard pal's corgi familiar) from wearing armor or barding. Whether it is proficient in armor is another matter.

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

In practice, I'd be inclined to rule it like this: you can create an infusion/RMI armor for your Steel Defender and it can wear it, but this represents a new base AC calculation, replacing the one it already has (12 + your Intelligence modifier) rather than augmenting it. If the armor is custom-built for the Steel Defender, then I'd consider it to have training with that armor, but no one else would be able to put it on because it's a bespoke thing.

Same. A strict take would be that since no form of armor was included in the stat block, the Steel Defender is not trained in any armor. I am generally lenient in this regard and would give it proficiency. Steel Defender in replicated Adamantine Plate Armor. :D

Quote from SunIsGettingRealLow96589 >>

"A strict take would be that since no form of armor was included in the stat block, the Steel Defender is not trained in any armor."

Even in a strict interpretation, it should qualify for barding, even if its not in the stat block. Warhorse stat block doesnt mention armor proficiencies or whether it qualifies for barding.

Barding is defined in phb as "Barding is armor designed for a mount. Any type of armor on the Armor table in this chapter can be purchased as barding. The cost is four times the normal cost, and it weighs twice as much."

 

A steel defender is not normally a mount. It would be a DM's call if it "has appropriate anatomy". Even so, I don't think that a "creature that can be used as a mount" is the same as "being a mount" in terms of whether barding is normally available. For example, a Centaur may "have appropriate anatomy" but does not wear barding.