Short Answer: no. "Unless an infusion’s description says otherwise, you can’t learn an infusion more than once." Without having two Artificers, you can't have two Enhanced Defenses.
Also, on dndbeyond, you can't get the same one twice, so that's how they interpret it.
There's probably debate about Replicate Magic Item (usually involving Bags of Holding). You can get Replicate Magic Item more than once, but each one needs to be a different magic item. (Dndbeyond also interprets this case this way; you can't learn the same one twice.)
That was what I was wanting to know. I keep looking in the 'Infuse Item' section which is where a basic rule should be not at the top of the infusion list.
That was what I was wanting to know. I keep looking in the 'Infuse Item' section which is where a basic rule should be not at the top of the infusion list.
The Basic Rule is basically anywhere in the game you can't take something twice unless it specifically tells you that you can. So it automatically applies to infusions without being stated.
Ironically, the replicate magic item infusion option does allow selecting the same item multiple times as long as you are willing to spend the infusions know and infusions active on it.
That's one way to read it (not obviously RAW), though a few things suggest it's still not true. "[E]ach of your infusions can be in only one object at a time" could prevent you from using it twice even if you had it twice. And (as stated above) it simply doesn't work in dndbeyond --- if you select a particular replicable magic item for one of your infusions, you can't select the same one again for a different infusion. Now, both of those are also interpretations, but I'd say RAI is at least as ambiguous as RAW.
Given that the designers have been kinda mum about replicate magic item (as far as I'm aware), it's safest to say it's up your DM. Regardless, duplicating the other, regular infusions is clearly prohibited.
They actually changed the wording of The replicate magic item from "different item" to "a item" early on in the printing of ERFLW. I think that fulfills the "unless an infusion's description says otherwise" clause. Purely RAW it works but there hasn't been any official clarification one way or the other. Artificerz are janky as a whole on beyond so I wouldn't use it as a way to determine how something should work.
It actually doesn't. Because that is not wording contradictory to the overall basic rule of the game that you can't take things twice unless they specifically say so. switching "different item" to "a item does" not change this rule in any way.
When you infuse an item it becomes magic and you can't infuse a magic item.
My annnoyance is enhanced defense call out both armor and shield. Why not one for each? I'm assuming bounded accuracy reasons but if a char going to spend infustion that way then let them It also limits the whole "I make magic weapons available to I hand out a magic weapon" which doesn't really fit that well in with artificier.
My annnoyance is enhanced defense call out both armor and shield. Why not one for each? I'm assuming bounded accuracy reasons but if a char going to spend infustion that way then let them It also limits the whole "I make magic weapons available to I hand out a magic weapon" which doesn't really fit that well in with artificier.
Basically bounded accuracy reasons, and to limit the temptation to put all your infusion "slots" into AC all the time.
An artificer can easily have AC 18 at level 1 (DEX 14, scale mail, shield). At level 2, it hits AC 19 due to Enhanced Defense. 20 as soon as they get ahold of half plate. 21 when they hit level 6 and can infuse Repulsion Shield... Basically, being able to duplicate infusions would be overkill.
When you infuse an item it becomes magic and you can't infuse a magic item.
My annnoyance is enhanced defense call out both armor and shield. Why not one for each? I'm assuming bounded accuracy reasons but if a char going to spend infustion that way then let them It also limits the whole "I make magic weapons available to I hand out a magic weapon" which doesn't really fit that well in with artificier.
Artificers can already get +2 armor, a +1 shield, a +1 cloak, and a +1 ring, for +5 AC just from their class features, while wielding a +1 hand crossbow or sling (the only class in the game that can do this). It's not a big deal they can't get another +1 to AC - AC 24 is already great. Also, AC has increasing returns - the improvement from AC 24 to 25 would be greater than the improvement from 23 to 24. Allowing more +1s to AC is very powerful and shouldn't be handwaved.
As it is, being able to duplicate Replicate Magic Item is incredibly powerful.
They actually changed the wording of The replicate magic item from "different item" to "a item" early on in the printing of ERFLW. I think that fulfills the "unless an infusion's description says otherwise" clause. Purely RAW it works but there hasn't been any official clarification one way or the other. Artificerz are janky as a whole on beyond so I wouldn't use it as a way to determine how something should work.
It actually doesn't. Because that is not wording contradictory to the overall basic rule of the game that you can't take things twice unless they specifically say so. switching "different item" to "a item does" not change this rule in any way.
I'm pretty sure that you're refering to the "rule" that two effects/features/spells with the same name don't apply both. There is no rule that you can't get a feature twice, although it is a thing thats usually impossible (i.e. fighting styles have an aditional rule and so on).
They actually changed the wording of The replicate magic item from "different item" to "a item" early on in the printing of ERFLW. I think that fulfills the "unless an infusion's description says otherwise" clause. Purely RAW it works but there hasn't been any official clarification one way or the other. Artificerz are janky as a whole on beyond so I wouldn't use it as a way to determine how something should work.
It actually doesn't. Because that is not wording contradictory to the overall basic rule of the game that you can't take things twice unless they specifically say so. switching "different item" to "a item does" not change this rule in any way.
I'm pretty sure that you're refering to the "rule" that two effects/features/spells with the same name don't apply both. There is no rule that you can't get a feature twice, although it is a thing thats usually impossible (i.e. fighting styles have an aditional rule and so on).
There actually is rule that says you can't get the same feature twice unless it says so. It's the Same Rule that stops you from picking up things like multiple forms of Unarmored Defense or getting Agonizing Blast and the like more than once.
Not only is it an overall design philosophy rule but it's a common sense rule as well. Fighting Style is ironically about the only place that actually calls out in specificity that you can't do it.
However in the game there are plenty of places where people would love to stack things but they cannot do so because they cannot get the same thing again. The Warlock in most particular comes to mind. But because you cannot have the same feature or double up on the same effect. Not just of spells. You cannot do things like get agonizing Blast Twice even though the invocation ability does not make the explicit claim that you cannot.
The Same holds true for Artificer and it's infusions.
Argueing that the Artificer can do it just shifts the parameters of an argument that has been raging since Artificer was made official. The argument of Sharing Infusions or keeping them all for the Artificer because they are the Artificers class features and thus basically the artificer can only function by using them all for themselves into the argument about how there are or aren't enough infusions to go around to be sharing them because they only have a very limited number of them that they can use anyway. The number of usable infusions by the artificer is rather fairly small afterall considering they can only have a maximum of 6 going at one time even at level 20 and a maximum of 12 known overall. Which makes doubling up on particular infusions make even less sense.
There is actually nothing stopping a warlock from taking an invocation twice they would just get no benefits from it due to how they are worded. AG says you can add your CHA modifier and taking it again doesn't change your Cha modifier.
Few outliners like book of secrets do have some benefits from taking multiple times but it has sharp diminishing returns.
Having Diminishing returns means that they are actually making allowances to take multiple times. And i haven't looked at that particular one but I'm betting it calls out in specificity that you actually can take them more than once which is actually a change to the rule for everything else.
And you can't take an invocation twice because again. You can't have the same feature twice, This is what Stops the Warlock and This is what stops the Artificer. Technically each item mimic style Infusion for the Artificer is a different feature. Part of the Reason why this is true is because the rules do not actually tell you that you can take them twice. There is no inclusion in the rules to tell you "yes you can have these multiple times". Which is important for the way 5e is written. There is every chance that the reason Fighting Styles mention specifically that you can't is because of old wording that they missed and didn't update as they were choosing how to write rules because the way it is written is entirely an oddity.
There is actually nothing stopping a warlock from taking an invocation twice they would just get no benefits from it due to how they are worded. AG says you can add your CHA modifier and taking it again doesn't change your Cha modifier.
Few outliners like book of secrets do have some benefits from taking multiple times but it has sharp diminishing returns.
Having Diminishing returns means that they are actually making allowances to take multiple times. And i haven't looked at that particular one but I'm betting it calls out in specificity that you actually can take them more than once which is actually a change to the rule for everything else.
And you can't take an invocation twice because again. You can't have the same feature twice, This is what Stops the Warlock and This is what stops the Artificer. Technically each item mimic style Infusion for the Artificer is a different feature. Part of the Reason why this is true is because the rules do not actually tell you that you can take them twice. There is no inclusion in the rules to tell you "yes you can have these multiple times". Which is important for the way 5e is written. There is every chance that the reason Fighting Styles mention specifically that you can't is because of old wording that they missed and didn't update as they were choosing how to write rules because the way it is written is entirely an oddity.
You can take any feature twice, in general. You have to be told when you can't. As a trivial example of this, a level 1 fighter level 2 ranger level 2 paladin has three copies of the Fighting Style feature. Each copy of Fighting Style specifies that you can't double up on the same style - which is explicitly stated under Fighting Style, because you can take anything multiple times unless told otherwise - so said character will have three different specific styles.
Absolutely nothing stops you from taking Agonizing Blast twice, as a Warlock. As the post-errata DMG specifies, effects of the same name don't stack, so two copies of that invocation aren't useful, but you can legally take it twice. There is simply no rule in the game generically preventing you from taking the same feature multiple times.
As for the Artificer, Replicate Magic Item explicitly tells you you can take it multiple times because there's a rule on infusions explicitly telling you you can't double up on them, exactly like with fighting styles. Again, there is no generic game-wide rule at play here.
Infusions in general: "Unless an infusion's description says otherwise, you can't learn an infusion more than once."
Replicate Magic Item: "You can learn this infusion multiple times; each time you do so, choose a magic item that you can make with it, picking from the Replicable Items tables."
EDIT: Scrolled up and read your earlier post. You are also incorrect about Unarmored Defense. A barbarian 1/monk 1 has both copies of Unarmored Defense and can choose between them freely. In fact, if we had more low CR high Con beasts, that might not even be a bad idea to mix into a moon druid.
There is actually nothing stopping a warlock from taking an invocation twice they would just get no benefits from it due to how they are worded. AG says you can add your CHA modifier and taking it again doesn't change your Cha modifier.
Few outliners like book of secrets do have some benefits from taking multiple times but it has sharp diminishing returns.
Having Diminishing returns means that they are actually making allowances to take multiple times. And i haven't looked at that particular one but I'm betting it calls out in specificity that you actually can take them more than once which is actually a change to the rule for everything else.
And you can't take an invocation twice because again. You can't have the same feature twice, This is what Stops the Warlock and This is what stops the Artificer. Technically each item mimic style Infusion for the Artificer is a different feature. Part of the Reason why this is true is because the rules do not actually tell you that you can take them twice. There is no inclusion in the rules to tell you "yes you can have these multiple times". Which is important for the way 5e is written. There is every chance that the reason Fighting Styles mention specifically that you can't is because of old wording that they missed and didn't update as they were choosing how to write rules because the way it is written is entirely an oddity.
You can take any feature twice, in general. You have to be told when you can't. As a trivial example of this, a level 1 fighter level 2 ranger level 2 paladin has three copies of the Fighting Style feature. Each copy of Fighting Style specifies that you can't double up on the same style - which is explicitly stated under Fighting Style, because you can take anything multiple times unless told otherwise - so said character will have three different specific styles.
Absolutely nothing stops you from taking Agonizing Blast twice, as a Warlock. As the post-errata DMG specifies, effects of the same name don't stack, so two copies of that invocation aren't useful, but you can legally take it twice. There is simply no rule in the game generically preventing you from taking the same feature multiple times.
As for the Artificer, Replicate Magic Item explicitly tells you you can take it multiple times because there's a rule on infusions explicitly telling you you can't double up on them, exactly like with fighting styles. Again, there is no generic game-wide rule at play here.
Infusions in general: "Unless an infusion's description says otherwise, you can't learn an infusion more than once."
Replicate Magic Item: "You can learn this infusion multiple times; each time you do so, choose a magic item that you can make with it, picking from the Replicable Items tables."
EDIT: Scrolled up and read your earlier post. You are also incorrect about Unarmored Defense. A barbarian 1/monk 1 has both copies of Unarmored Defense and can choose between them freely. In fact, if we had more low CR high Con beasts, that might not even be a bad idea to mix into a moon druid.
No. You do not have to be told when you can't. You have to be told when you can. The absence of being told you can't does not necessarily mean you can.
And I'm not incorrect about Unarmored Defense. Even the multiclassing rules say that you can't have both. You only get the first one that you had. Which your ignoring. It is the specific example used when it comes to multiclassing that rules out the same feature from multiple classes. They do not get to choose. They only get the one from the class that they had first. The other example that they bring up is Extra Attack. It does not stack. they get it from the first class that gets to level 5 and then not again no matter how many times they get to level 5 in a class that has it after that.
No. You do not have to be told when you can't. You have to be told when you can. The absence of being told you can't does not necessarily mean you can.
Ok, look. I've cited actual sources to you. Unless you can cite a source back, I'm not going to continue this. The only source you did cite contradicts you: you're right and I'm wrong about unarmored defense; you're explicitly banned from getting it twice. According to you, this is a waste of ink - you're automatically banned from taking anything twice.
Be aware everyone else in the world, though, is taking the same thing twice unless the game tells us not to, because that's how D&D is played.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Can an artificier pick the same infusion twice? Wondering if there is some addendum I've missed or is D&D Beyond just not allowing it?
Wanting to pick the infusion:Enhanced Defense twice and place one on armor and the second on shield.
Yes I know repulsion shield makes a shield +1 but 1) not available till 6th level, 2) multi-class build idea and only 3 levels of artificier.
Short Answer: no. "Unless an infusion’s description says otherwise, you can’t learn an infusion more than once." Without having two Artificers, you can't have two Enhanced Defenses.
Also, on dndbeyond, you can't get the same one twice, so that's how they interpret it.
There's probably debate about Replicate Magic Item (usually involving Bags of Holding). You can get Replicate Magic Item more than once, but each one needs to be a different magic item. (Dndbeyond also interprets this case this way; you can't learn the same one twice.)
That was what I was wanting to know. I keep looking in the 'Infuse Item' section which is where a basic rule should be not at the top of the infusion list.
The Basic Rule is basically anywhere in the game you can't take something twice unless it specifically tells you that you can. So it automatically applies to infusions without being stated.
That's one way to read it (not obviously RAW), though a few things suggest it's still not true. "[E]ach of your infusions can be in only one object at a time" could prevent you from using it twice even if you had it twice. And (as stated above) it simply doesn't work in dndbeyond --- if you select a particular replicable magic item for one of your infusions, you can't select the same one again for a different infusion. Now, both of those are also interpretations, but I'd say RAI is at least as ambiguous as RAW.
Given that the designers have been kinda mum about replicate magic item (as far as I'm aware), it's safest to say it's up your DM. Regardless, duplicating the other, regular infusions is clearly prohibited.
It actually doesn't. Because that is not wording contradictory to the overall basic rule of the game that you can't take things twice unless they specifically say so. switching "different item" to "a item does" not change this rule in any way.
When you infuse an item it becomes magic and you can't infuse a magic item.
My annnoyance is enhanced defense call out both armor and shield. Why not one for each? I'm assuming bounded accuracy reasons but if a char going to spend infustion that way then let them It also limits the whole "I make magic weapons available to I hand out a magic weapon" which doesn't really fit that well in with artificier.
Basically bounded accuracy reasons, and to limit the temptation to put all your infusion "slots" into AC all the time.
An artificer can easily have AC 18 at level 1 (DEX 14, scale mail, shield). At level 2, it hits AC 19 due to Enhanced Defense. 20 as soon as they get ahold of half plate. 21 when they hit level 6 and can infuse Repulsion Shield... Basically, being able to duplicate infusions would be overkill.
Artificers can already get +2 armor, a +1 shield, a +1 cloak, and a +1 ring, for +5 AC just from their class features, while wielding a +1 hand crossbow or sling (the only class in the game that can do this). It's not a big deal they can't get another +1 to AC - AC 24 is already great. Also, AC has increasing returns - the improvement from AC 24 to 25 would be greater than the improvement from 23 to 24. Allowing more +1s to AC is very powerful and shouldn't be handwaved.
As it is, being able to duplicate Replicate Magic Item is incredibly powerful.
I'm pretty sure that you're refering to the "rule" that two effects/features/spells with the same name don't apply both. There is no rule that you can't get a feature twice, although it is a thing thats usually impossible (i.e. fighting styles have an aditional rule and so on).
There actually is rule that says you can't get the same feature twice unless it says so. It's the Same Rule that stops you from picking up things like multiple forms of Unarmored Defense or getting Agonizing Blast and the like more than once.
Not only is it an overall design philosophy rule but it's a common sense rule as well. Fighting Style is ironically about the only place that actually calls out in specificity that you can't do it.
However in the game there are plenty of places where people would love to stack things but they cannot do so because they cannot get the same thing again. The Warlock in most particular comes to mind. But because you cannot have the same feature or double up on the same effect. Not just of spells. You cannot do things like get agonizing Blast Twice even though the invocation ability does not make the explicit claim that you cannot.
The Same holds true for Artificer and it's infusions.
Argueing that the Artificer can do it just shifts the parameters of an argument that has been raging since Artificer was made official. The argument of Sharing Infusions or keeping them all for the Artificer because they are the Artificers class features and thus basically the artificer can only function by using them all for themselves into the argument about how there are or aren't enough infusions to go around to be sharing them because they only have a very limited number of them that they can use anyway. The number of usable infusions by the artificer is rather fairly small afterall considering they can only have a maximum of 6 going at one time even at level 20 and a maximum of 12 known overall. Which makes doubling up on particular infusions make even less sense.
Having Diminishing returns means that they are actually making allowances to take multiple times. And i haven't looked at that particular one but I'm betting it calls out in specificity that you actually can take them more than once which is actually a change to the rule for everything else.
And you can't take an invocation twice because again. You can't have the same feature twice, This is what Stops the Warlock and This is what stops the Artificer. Technically each item mimic style Infusion for the Artificer is a different feature. Part of the Reason why this is true is because the rules do not actually tell you that you can take them twice. There is no inclusion in the rules to tell you "yes you can have these multiple times". Which is important for the way 5e is written. There is every chance that the reason Fighting Styles mention specifically that you can't is because of old wording that they missed and didn't update as they were choosing how to write rules because the way it is written is entirely an oddity.
You can take any feature twice, in general. You have to be told when you can't. As a trivial example of this, a level 1 fighter level 2 ranger level 2 paladin has three copies of the Fighting Style feature. Each copy of Fighting Style specifies that you can't double up on the same style - which is explicitly stated under Fighting Style, because you can take anything multiple times unless told otherwise - so said character will have three different specific styles.
Absolutely nothing stops you from taking Agonizing Blast twice, as a Warlock. As the post-errata DMG specifies, effects of the same name don't stack, so two copies of that invocation aren't useful, but you can legally take it twice. There is simply no rule in the game generically preventing you from taking the same feature multiple times.
As for the Artificer, Replicate Magic Item explicitly tells you you can take it multiple times because there's a rule on infusions explicitly telling you you can't double up on them, exactly like with fighting styles. Again, there is no generic game-wide rule at play here.
Infusions in general: "Unless an infusion's description says otherwise, you can't learn an infusion more than once."
Replicate Magic Item: "You can learn this infusion multiple times; each time you do so, choose a magic item that you can make with it, picking from the Replicable Items tables."
EDIT: Scrolled up and read your earlier post. You are also incorrect about Unarmored Defense. A barbarian 1/monk 1 has both copies of Unarmored Defense and can choose between them freely. In fact, if we had more low CR high Con beasts, that might not even be a bad idea to mix into a moon druid.
No. You do not have to be told when you can't. You have to be told when you can. The absence of being told you can't does not necessarily mean you can.
And I'm not incorrect about Unarmored Defense. Even the multiclassing rules say that you can't have both. You only get the first one that you had. Which your ignoring. It is the specific example used when it comes to multiclassing that rules out the same feature from multiple classes. They do not get to choose. They only get the one from the class that they had first. The other example that they bring up is Extra Attack. It does not stack. they get it from the first class that gets to level 5 and then not again no matter how many times they get to level 5 in a class that has it after that.
Ok, look. I've cited actual sources to you. Unless you can cite a source back, I'm not going to continue this. The only source you did cite contradicts you: you're right and I'm wrong about unarmored defense; you're explicitly banned from getting it twice. According to you, this is a waste of ink - you're automatically banned from taking anything twice.
Be aware everyone else in the world, though, is taking the same thing twice unless the game tells us not to, because that's how D&D is played.