So, after taking a look at the New subclasses for Artificer, I discovered the interesting interaction between a medium quadruped and a small biped. This is most likely not RAI, but it works RAW. Due to specific rules overwriting general rules the Iron Defender uses the specific rules assigned to it for turn order and actions taken. These are what I could identify as the rules that govern this circumstance:
1. For the purposes of turns, the Iron Defender is considered an independent mount under player control. However...
2. The Iron Defender ALWAYS takes its turn after the Artificer.
3. The Iron Defender can only use the dodge and move actions on its turn. Unless...
4. The Artificer uses his/her bonus action to command the Iron Defender. The command allows the Iron Defender a choice between the Dash, Disengage, Help, Bite, or Repair actions.
5. The Iron Defender can take reactions as normal.
6. All other general Mounted Combat rules apply.
What are all of your thoughts on this? Does it feel overpowered? Would you rule against it? Do you think it will/should be changed?
Addendum: Combine with mounted combatant, allowing you to take attacks aimed at the Iron Defender, then use the Iron Defender's reaction to apply disadvantage. (assuming enemy is within 5 feet.)
Regarding the Addendum, I'm not sure where it allows you to take attacks aimed at the Iron Defender, but I could be wrong. There is, however, a section where if the mount (in this case Iron Defender) provokes an opportunity attack, the attacker can choose target either the mount (Iron Defender) or the rider. If the attacker chooses to target the rider, it is within the rules for the mount (Iron Defender) to use its reaction to Defensive Pounce.
I don't really see this as overpowered. I have a Kobold Battle Smith and it has really caused any problems.
Omg, I have been daydreaming about a kobold battlesmith all day today. On an iron defender shaped like a drake. Anyways, freak out over. mounted combatant is a feat. Which is how you force the target change.
Ran across a dragon+ where Jeremy Crawford answered this question. He said, that if you fulfill all the requirements in the mount rules, then it can be used as a mount.
Rather than taking the Mounted Combat feat and directing attacks to the rider, you could instead pick up a Saddle of the Cavalier (Wondrous item, uncommon). That way the attacks against either the rider or the mount will be at disadvantage. If the mount is hit the rider can always just use bonus actions to have it heal. This also comes with a big plus that your small Battlesmith can't be knocked off the mount.
"While in this saddle on a mount, you can't be dismounted against your will if you're conscious, and attack rolls against the mount have disadvantage."
I have a few questions as well as a few answers. You would not require a saddle if you were to build the seat directly into the defender, no rule against it and the fact you can build it in the first place would prove such a small detail would be extremely simple, if you wanted to be picky, make it a smith tool check, though we know only a 1 at that point would be a fail. My question is this, it says it can be a bear (not the stats ofc), and all bear's are Large Creatures, meaning that anything smaller then a bear with 4 legs (meaning any kind of horse because they are all smaller then a bear in a way), because of it's increased size, would you raise it's carry weight capacity? It's one size larger then medium, which is the original 210 weight, but because it's larger, logically speaking, it's capacity would also increase would it not?
My question is this, it says it can be a bear (not the stats ofc), and all bear's are Large Creatures, meaning that anything smaller then a bear with 4 legs (meaning any kind of horse because they are all smaller then a bear in a way), because of it's increased size, would you raise it's carry weight capacity? It's one size larger then medium, which is the original 210 weight, but because it's larger, logically speaking, it's capacity would also increase would it not?
RAW the iron defender can resemble a bear but it would still be a medium construct with a Strength of 14. Modifying it to be a large construct is probably something you could work out with your DM.
not really, both of your movements are on in the same, he just can't take any actions until his turn, and if you have him dash then he won't have an actual action that turn.
normally yes, but any creature you ride as a mount that has a Int less then 6 you can control it's movement on you turn, it can get it's own turn it just won't be able to move any more then it's movement allows per turn
Might of the Master. The following numbers increase by 1 when your proficiency bonus increases by 1: the defender’s skill and saving throw bonuses (above), the bonuses to hit and damage of its rend attack, and the number of hit points restored by its Repair action (below).
Vigilant. The defender can’t be surprised.
Steel Defender. In combat, the steel defender shares your initiative count, 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 one of the actions in its stat block or the Dash, Disengage, Help, Hide, or Search action.
If the mending spell is cast on it, it regains 2d6 hit points. If it has died within the last hour, you can use your smith’s tools as an action to revive it, provided you are within 5 feet of it and you expend a spell slot of 1st level or higher. The steel defender returns to life after 1 minute with all its hit points restored.
Actions
Force-Empowered Rend. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target you can see. Hit: 1d8 + 2 force damage.
Repair (3/Day). The magical mechanisms inside the defender restore 2d8 + 2 hit points to itself or to one construct or object within 5 feet of it.
Reactions
Deflect Attack. The defender imposes disadvantage on the attack roll of one creature it can see that is within 5 feet of it, provided the attack roll is against a creature other than the defender.
Description
You determine the creature’s appearance and whether it has two legs or four; your choice has no effect on its game statistics.
The OP is referring to the UA "Iron Defender", which is what the Steel Defender in RftLW was originally named during the UA playtest phase. They renamed it to Steel Defender because a monster called the Iron Defender was already being included in RftLW and they wanted to avoid any confusion between the two.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, after taking a look at the New subclasses for Artificer, I discovered the interesting interaction between a medium quadruped and a small biped. This is most likely not RAI, but it works RAW. Due to specific rules overwriting general rules the Iron Defender uses the specific rules assigned to it for turn order and actions taken. These are what I could identify as the rules that govern this circumstance:
1. For the purposes of turns, the Iron Defender is considered an independent mount under player control. However...
2. The Iron Defender ALWAYS takes its turn after the Artificer.
3. The Iron Defender can only use the dodge and move actions on its turn. Unless...
4. The Artificer uses his/her bonus action to command the Iron Defender. The command allows the Iron Defender a choice between the Dash, Disengage, Help, Bite, or Repair actions.
5. The Iron Defender can take reactions as normal.
6. All other general Mounted Combat rules apply.
What are all of your thoughts on this? Does it feel overpowered? Would you rule against it? Do you think it will/should be changed?
Addendum: Combine with mounted combatant, allowing you to take attacks aimed at the Iron Defender, then use the Iron Defender's reaction to apply disadvantage. (assuming enemy is within 5 feet.)
Regarding the Addendum, I'm not sure where it allows you to take attacks aimed at the Iron Defender, but I could be wrong. There is, however, a section where if the mount (in this case Iron Defender) provokes an opportunity attack, the attacker can choose target either the mount (Iron Defender) or the rider. If the attacker chooses to target the rider, it is within the rules for the mount (Iron Defender) to use its reaction to Defensive Pounce.
I don't really see this as overpowered. I have a Kobold Battle Smith and it has really caused any problems.
Omg, I have been daydreaming about a kobold battlesmith all day today. On an iron defender shaped like a drake. Anyways, freak out over. mounted combatant is a feat. Which is how you force the target change.
Oh, yea, with that requiring a feat I don't consider it over powered.
Using it as a mount isn't OP, and taking the feat isn't overpowered. I'd be down with it.
Yeah, my Kobold uses his Iron Defender and it is awesomely fun.
Ran across a dragon+ where Jeremy Crawford answered this question. He said, that if you fulfill all the requirements in the mount rules, then it can be used as a mount.
Rather than taking the Mounted Combat feat and directing attacks to the rider, you could instead pick up a Saddle of the Cavalier (Wondrous item, uncommon). That way the attacks against either the rider or the mount will be at disadvantage. If the mount is hit the rider can always just use bonus actions to have it heal. This also comes with a big plus that your small Battlesmith can't be knocked off the mount.
"While in this saddle on a mount, you can't be dismounted against your will if you're conscious, and attack rolls against the mount have disadvantage."
I have a few questions as well as a few answers. You would not require a saddle if you were to build the seat directly into the defender, no rule against it and the fact you can build it in the first place would prove such a small detail would be extremely simple, if you wanted to be picky, make it a smith tool check, though we know only a 1 at that point would be a fail. My question is this, it says it can be a bear (not the stats ofc), and all bear's are Large Creatures, meaning that anything smaller then a bear with 4 legs (meaning any kind of horse because they are all smaller then a bear in a way), because of it's increased size, would you raise it's carry weight capacity? It's one size larger then medium, which is the original 210 weight, but because it's larger, logically speaking, it's capacity would also increase would it not?
RAW the iron defender can resemble a bear but it would still be a medium construct with a Strength of 14. Modifying it to be a large construct is probably something you could work out with your DM.
Give your character the reduce/enlarge spell.
In combat, the iron defender shares your initiative count, but it takes its turn immediately after yours.
This is going to make it difficult for a mount.
not really, both of your movements are on in the same, he just can't take any actions until his turn, and if you have him dash then he won't have an actual action that turn.
No, I am pretty sure it movement is after your turn..
normally yes, but any creature you ride as a mount that has a Int less then 6 you can control it's movement on you turn, it can get it's own turn it just won't be able to move any more then it's movement allows per turn
I have the book EBERRON Rising From The Last War.
The Battle Smith gets a Steel Defender, not an Iron Defender
I would like to know how to get an Iron Defender?
Iron Defender is what the Steel Defender was called when the Battlesmith was still Unearthed Arcana content before the new book came out.
The Iron Defender IS the Steel Defender, it is just what they called it in the old UA.
I have I have the book EBERRON Rising From The Last War.
The Iron Defender and the Steel Defender are not the same creature. They have different stat blocks.
Might of the Master. The following numbers increase by 1 when your proficiency bonus increases by 1: the defender’s skill and saving throw bonuses (above), the bonuses to hit and damage of its rend attack, and the number of hit points restored by its Repair action (below).
Vigilant. The defender can’t be surprised.
Steel Defender. In combat, the steel defender shares your initiative count, 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 one of the actions in its stat block or the Dash, Disengage, Help, Hide, or Search action.
If the mending spell is cast on it, it regains 2d6 hit points. If it has died within the last hour, you can use your smith’s tools as an action to revive it, provided you are within 5 feet of it and you expend a spell slot of 1st level or higher. The steel defender returns to life after 1 minute with all its hit points restored.
Force-Empowered Rend. Melee Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target you can see. Hit: 1d8 + 2 force damage.
Repair (3/Day). The magical mechanisms inside the defender restore 2d8 + 2 hit points to itself or to one construct or object within 5 feet of it.
Deflect Attack. The defender imposes disadvantage on the attack roll of one creature it can see that is within 5 feet of it, provided the attack roll is against a creature other than the defender.
Description
You determine the creature’s appearance and whether it has two legs or four; your choice has no effect on its game statistics.
The OP is referring to the UA "Iron Defender", which is what the Steel Defender in RftLW was originally named during the UA playtest phase. They renamed it to Steel Defender because a monster called the Iron Defender was already being included in RftLW and they wanted to avoid any confusion between the two.