didn't read full thread but i love tool expertise. particluarly with the new All Purpose Tool.
Effectively.. if I use a feat or varietn racial hertiage I can get good skills with all the tools. Which really lets me be the
"item master class" It really helps fulfil my fantasy~ Similar to how a Bard is a jack of all trades or rogue is the "hyper skilled focused, whose reliable"
hey peeps, permafunk here for those looking for a solid answer amongst the arguing, I think the consensus is that having all tools (vehicles/gaming sets/instruments included) be effected by this ability makes sense because artificers (in the nicest way possible) are nerds.
An Artisan proficiency? Well its obvious, you make things, that's kinda the whole class.
A Game Set proficiency? You've had sleepless nights practicing against a small chess-playing mechanism (à la "The Turk") that you made.
A Vehicle proficiency? As said in the convo already, you're a bike-nut, and are a big fan of locomotion.
An Instrument proficiency? There's just something about how pianos work that just UGH, you love that s***.
in the case of an instrument (which seems to be a worry near the start of the convo) proficiency in it DOES indeed mean you know how to play it, but that doesn't mean you can out perform the bard, after all that would be a performance check which is charisma based. (And if you, the artificer, have better charisma than the bard, well then you'd probably be better at it even without the expertise.)
a easier way to visualise this difference in the bard and artificers abilities would be the bards ability to MAKE music, yes the arti can PLAY the instrument, but proficiency in an instrument doesn't mean you can write or improvise a song, put the arti in an orchestra and they do fine, but in the middle of an inn full of people waiting for a fabulous impromptu performance, they'd be lacking. however on the flipside, if it came to keeping that instrument well kept, knowing how its made, how it works or repairing it, the artificer would probably know more.
tl;dr: artificers aren't experts in a skill that requires cunning or some level of street smarts, like reading people or sneaking around, they're experts in fabricated things, things that are logical and mechanical, that have rules to them, so it makes sense that they have the ability to be experts at more than just artisan tools.
Some food for thought. Theme your artificer, as it will justify a lot of tool proficiencies, make them more fun, and more versatile. Artificer’s can get a lot of proficient tools depending on race and background. This can create a lot of flavor, and a character than feels more like a unique class at times than just an artificer. For example, I made a Warforged artificer that was built to be the ultimate sailor, so he had the sailor background. Thanks to that, his racial tool proficiency choice and proficiencies from the artificer class, he ended up with proficiency in almost every tool I could think of that he’d need to maintain and sail a ship.
TLDR: You can justify a lot of tool proficiencies via a character theme that makes them not just an artisan of a craft.
I don't think that there's a problem with an artificer gaining technical expertise with a musical instrument above non-artificers generally.
If anything the problem is with bards that they don't receive a parallel form of musical instrument expertise.
If a player asked me if they could add this extra expertise at 3rd level I'd certainly say yes.
Also, if a player's 6th level artificer had proficiency in a musical instrument with expertise, I might assume that bards of at least a similar level had a similar level of musical instrument expertise. But this may depend on whether I thought bards could be under threat.
In many cases, an artificer's performance skill may be hampered by a comparatively moderate artificer relevant level of charisma. Bards may be challenged by a rare artificer with proficiency with a limited number of musical instruments but, with their base of three musical instrument proficiencies, might only very rarely be outshone.
I don't think that there's a problem with an artificer gaining technical expertise with a musical instrument above non-artificers generally.
If anything the problem is with bards that they don't receive a parallel form of musical instrument expertise.
If a player asked me if they could add this extra expertise at 3rd level I'd certainly say yes.
Also, if a player's 6th level artificer had proficiency in a musical instrument with expertise, I might assume that bards of at least a similar level had a similar level of musical instrument expertise. But this may depend on whether I thought bards could be under threat.
In many cases, an artificer's performance skill may be hampered by a comparatively moderate artificer relevant level of charisma. Bards may be challenged by a rare artificer with proficiency with a limited number of musical instruments but, with their base of three musical instrument proficiencies, might only very rarely be outshone.
Personally, I'd rule that a Bard can gain a proficiency in a new musical instrument in 1d20 - class level days for free to a minimum of 1 day.
I don't think that there's a problem with an artificer gaining technical expertise with a musical instrument above non-artificers generally.
If anything the problem is with bards that they don't receive a parallel form of musical instrument expertise.
I do think that Artificers probably weren't intended to be proficient in musical instruments, and whoever wrote the rules forgot they're included in tools. It probably should have been limited to Thieves' Tools, Tinker's Tools and artisan's tools (like the base proficiencies).
However, you arguably don't need expertise in a musical instrument as a Bard; take the expertise in Performance, then use a musical instrument proficiency to gain advantage. It's not a well specified part of tool usage (major failure in the rules IMO) but Xanathar's Guide to Everything makes it pretty clear that this is how it's intended to work as it's a skill that clearly combines with a tool, which not every tool does.
In this way to gain the same benefit as the Bard the Artificer has to take performance proficiency, otherwise they just have the expertise only (no advantage), and only in as many instruments as they can gain proficiency for. A Bard with Performance expertise meanwhile effectively has expertise even in instruments they don't specifically have training in, but advantage with the ones that they do.
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 don't think that there's a problem with an artificer gaining technical expertise with a musical instrument above non-artificers generally.
If anything the problem is with bards that they don't receive a parallel form of musical instrument expertise.
I do think that Artificers probably weren't intended to be proficient in musical instruments, and whoever wrote the rules forgot they're included in tools. It probably should have been limited to Thieves' Tools, Tinker's Tools and artisan's tools (like the base proficiencies).
However, you arguably don't need expertise in a musical instrument as a Bard; take the expertise in Performance, then use a musical instrument proficiency to gain advantage. It's not a well specified part of tool usage (major failure in the rules IMO) but Xanathar's Guide to Everything makes it pretty clear that this is how it's intended to work as it's a skill that clearly combines with a tool, which not every tool does.
In this way to gain the same benefit as the Bard the Artificer has to take performance proficiency, otherwise they just have the expertise only (no advantage), and only in as many instruments as they can gain proficiency for. A Bard with Performance expertise meanwhile effectively has expertise even in instruments they don't specifically have training in, but advantage with the ones that they do.
i mean again, the artificer is the master of the magic of stuff generally, infusing magic into mundane items, and you can infuse a pair of "pipes of the sewers" to cast spells using a musical instrument. Plus that short list you said would also exlude poisoner's kit, disguise kit and herbalisim kit, all of whom i would safely say should have this bonus included, same arguably goes for Navigator's Tools (you already get cartographer's applied, why not these?) and the forgery kit (calligrapher's supplies, but not these?). It is faster and easier just to say all tools and dealing with the fun stuff that comes afterwards than to come up with a set list of tools it applies to like a fun limiter
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
I don't think that there's a problem with an artificer gaining technical expertise with a musical instrument above non-artificers generally.
If anything the problem is with bards that they don't receive a parallel form of musical instrument expertise.
I do think that Artificers probably weren't intended to be proficient in musical instruments, and whoever wrote the rules forgot they're included in tools. It probably should have been limited to Thieves' Tools, Tinker's Tools and artisan's tools (like the base proficiencies).
However, you arguably don't need expertise in a musical instrument as a Bard; take the expertise in Performance, then use a musical instrument proficiency to gain advantage. It's not a well specified part of tool usage (major failure in the rules IMO) but Xanathar's Guide to Everything makes it pretty clear that this is how it's intended to work as it's a skill that clearly combines with a tool, which not every tool does.
In this way to gain the same benefit as the Bard the Artificer has to take performance proficiency, otherwise they just have the expertise only (no advantage), and only in as many instruments as they can gain proficiency for. A Bard with Performance expertise meanwhile effectively has expertise even in instruments they don't specifically have training in, but advantage with the ones that they do.
i mean again, the artificer is the master of the magic of stuff generally, infusing magic into mundane items, and you can infuse a pair of "pipes of the sewers" to cast spells using a musical instrument. Plus that short list you said would also exlude poisoner's kit, disguise kit and herbalisim kit, all of whom i would safely say should have this bonus included, same arguably goes for Navigator's Tools (you already get cartographer's applied, why not these?) and the forgery kit (calligrapher's supplies, but not these?). It is faster and easier just to say all tools and dealing with the fun stuff that comes afterwards than to come up with a set list of tools it applies to like a fun limiter
I'd add in the fact that Perfomance is not necessarily just effectively proficiency in all musical instruments. Performance covers a lot of things but it does not necessarily automatically give you knowledge into how to play a tuba or a harp with any real skill. Which effectively makes knowledge in those instruments just that much more valuable rather than trying to always find reasons to discount them.
Xanathar's just adds to the idea of seperate but somewhat overlapping. A musical instrument can certainly be used in a performance... but Much of performance doesn't touch on playing musical instruments and more incorporates an outside knowledge into certain aspects of it. This is why Bards ALL come with Three Musical Instruments that they know. On top of their performance abilities, and even ability to Expertise in it. It's incorporating that outside knowledge. The tool knowledge for musical instruments is so ingrained into bards that even bards that don't particularly do musical stuff performance wise still uses musical instruments to cast their magic in 5e. The magical instruments are their spell casting focus for the class.
I don't think that there's a problem with an artificer gaining technical expertise with a musical instrument above non-artificers generally.
If anything the problem is with bards that they don't receive a parallel form of musical instrument expertise.
I do think that Artificers probably weren't intended to be proficient in musical instruments, and whoever wrote the rules forgot they're included in tools. It probably should have been limited to Thieves' Tools, Tinker's Tools and artisan's tools (like the base proficiencies).
However, you arguably don't need expertise in a musical instrument as a Bard; take the expertise in Performance, then use a musical instrument proficiency to gain advantage. It's not a well specified part of tool usage (major failure in the rules IMO) but Xanathar's Guide to Everything makes it pretty clear that this is how it's intended to work as it's a skill that clearly combines with a tool, which not every tool does.
In this way to gain the same benefit as the Bard the Artificer has to take performance proficiency, otherwise they just have the expertise only (no advantage), and only in as many instruments as they can gain proficiency for. A Bard with Performance expertise meanwhile effectively has expertise even in instruments they don't specifically have training in, but advantage with the ones that they do.
i mean again, the artificer is the master of the magic of stuff generally, infusing magic into mundane items, and you can infuse a pair of "pipes of the sewers" to cast spells using a musical instrument. Plus that short list you said would also exlude poisoner's kit, disguise kit and herbalisim kit, all of whom i would safely say should have this bonus included, same arguably goes for Navigator's Tools (you already get cartographer's applied, why not these?) and the forgery kit (calligrapher's supplies, but not these?). It is faster and easier just to say all tools and dealing with the fun stuff that comes afterwards than to come up with a set list of tools it applies to like a fun limiter
I'd add in the fact that Perfomance is not necessarily just effectively proficiency in all musical instruments. Performance covers a lot of things but it does not necessarily automatically give you knowledge into how to play a tuba or a harp with any real skill. Which effectively makes knowledge in those instruments just that much more valuable rather than trying to always find reasons to discount them.
Xanathar's just adds to the idea of seperate but somewhat overlapping. A musical instrument can certainly be used in a performance... but Much of performance doesn't touch on playing musical instruments and more incorporates an outside knowledge into certain aspects of it. This is why Bards ALL come with Three Musical Instruments that they know. On top of their performance abilities, and even ability to Expertise in it. It's incorporating that outside knowledge. The tool knowledge for musical instruments is so ingrained into bards that even bards that don't particularly do musical stuff performance wise still uses musical instruments to cast their magic in 5e. The magical instruments are their spell casting focus for the class.
The description of 5e Artificers begins, "Masters of invention, artificers use ingenuity and magic to unlock extraordinary capabilities in objects." Some may think it's strange that we then find that artificers have no special power with non-magical invention. Some might consider this lack, a little silly but that, RAW, is just the way it is.
We read, perhaps in parallel, that "The bard is a master of song, speech, and the magic they contain". Some may think it's strange that we then find that bards have no special power with non-magical performance skills but, RAW, that's just the way it is.
What I do think is that it is strange the imbalance where artificers can gain expertise with musical instruments while bards can't. If WotC agree they might rebalance in 6e.
I do think that Artificers probably weren't intended to be proficient in musical instruments, and whoever wrote the rules forgot they're included in tools. ...
This kind of thing certainly fits a fair RAI interpretation:
The proficiencies of artificers include Tools: Thieves' tools, tinker's tools, one type of artisan's tools of your choice and yet class features of artificers include Tool Expertise: Starting at 6th level, your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses your proficiency with a tool.
However, it's also possible that they simply intended artificers to be basically good at stuff. In this case, I think that a broader question might be asked: should it be possible for anyone to gain expertise in music at all? If no then an appropriate option might be to nerf the artificer. If yes then it might be more suitable, in some way/ways, to buff the bard.
Remember that an artificer would be making a significant sacrifice to take on a musical instrument and performance proficiency whilst also buffing charisma. If an artificer does all this and if it's possible to gain musical instrument expertise, who knows, maybe they'd be good.
This kind of thing certainly fits a fair RAI interpretation:
The proficiencies of artificers include Tools: Thieves' tools, tinker's tools, one type of artisan's tools of your choice and yet class features of artificers include Tool Expertise: Starting at 6th level, your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses your proficiency with a tool.
However, it's also possible that they simply intended artificers to be basically good at stuff. In this case, I think that a broader question might be asked: should it be possible for anyone to gain expertise in music at all? If no then an appropriate option might be to nerf the artificer. If yes then it might be more suitable, in some way/ways, to buff the bard.
Remember that an artificer would be making a significant sacrifice to take on a musical instrument and performance proficiency whilst also buffing charisma. If an artificer does all this and if it's possible to gain musical instrument expertise, who knows, maybe they'd be good.
An Artificer is highly Single Attribute Dependent. maybe requiring a bit of Con if your really determined to do something like a tanking role. But otherwise it is not a significant sacrifice to gain charisma buffs, or to gain performance Proficiency since there are something like 5 backgrounds that you can get it from. Such as Entertainer, Gladiator, or Ginner just to name 3. But I know there are more.
The bard can also pick up a 4th musical instrument from a number of different backgrounds as well. So they aren't hard set limited to three instruments. They just have a minimum of 3.
On top of that both of them can learn such things in their downtime for the cost of 250 gold which cannot be ignored.
So No. There is no "significant Sacrifice" to be made. They are fairly easily obtainable from both sides.
i mean again, the artificer is the master of the magic of stuff generally, infusing magic into mundane items, and you can infuse a pair of "pipes of the sewers" to cast spells using a musical instrument. Plus that short list you said would also exlude poisoner's kit, disguise kit and herbalisim kit, all of whom i would safely say should have this bonus included, same arguably goes for Navigator's Tools (you already get cartographer's applied, why not these?) and the forgery kit (calligrapher's supplies, but not these?). It is faster and easier just to say all tools and dealing with the fun stuff that comes afterwards than to come up with a set list of tools it applies to like a fun limiter
I'd still make the same argument actually; none of these exactly screams "an artificer would be naturally better at this" to me, though an Alchemist certainly might be the edge case for Alchemist's Supplies and a Poisoner's Kit, but should an Artificer be able to get free expertise in Disguise Kit etc.? I'm not sure personally as they don't fall under the same kind of crafting that's emphasised by the class.
While you could absolutely argue that they could invent something to make these things easier/better (and I'd agree with you), I feel like that would be better covered by a tool infusion, an expansion of Magical Tinkering, or some other specific ability rather than blanket expertise over everything. As much as I love the class, one of my biggest criticisms of it is that mechanically it's built for zero effort; while you can (and should) add extra steps to emphasise that your character isn't simply being granted bonuses, but rather earning them through hard work, the Tools Expertise is IMO one of the lazier features that doesn't feel right when you expand it out too far (i.e- beyond clear crafting tools).
While calligrapher's tools vs. forgery kit and cartographer's tools vs. navigators tools may seem odd at first glance, the distinction makes sense; forgery implies copying rather than creation/invention, and likewise navigating is following a course, not setting it. Again this is why I don't think a blanket expertise is the best way to handle it, as while an artificer could probably invent something to do forgery or navigation more easily, it should be by making the tools more specialised, not allowing you to just pick up any navigator's tools and be better than the owner is at using them.
I'd add in the fact that Perfomance is not necessarily just effectively proficiency in all musical instruments.
It actually kind of is:
Your Charisma (Performance) check determines how well you can delight an audience with music, dance, acting, storytelling, or some other form of entertainment.
Now if your goal is to play a viol at a competition level then obviously, yeah, proficiency in the instrument itself is probably going to be required. But if you're just trying to entertain then that's straight performance, as you don't necessarily have to be any good with an instrument to entertain people with it; your DM might rule differently for an instrument that's completely outlandish compared to what you have proficiency in, but if you're proficient with a lute then you should be able to carry a basic tune on another stringed instrument enough to perform, even if it's not quite as technically impressive as one you're fully proficient in (that's where the overlapping proficiencies come in).
I guess technically you might not be entertaining with the instrument as such doing it this way; it may be more the tune or a song you're accompanying with it that is the real entertainment value, or some other showmanship or such. But outside of more specialist circles you should be able to entertain with one even if you're not proficient. Someone who can't play a drum at an expert level can still use one to tap out a rhythm etc.
Besides, your average Bard has access to a lot of musical instrument proficiencies to stack together for advantage as well; they get three as standard from the class, and if you want to emphasise it you can pick up two more with a background unless you'd prefer a crafting tool or language instead. So I'd argue they still have something of an edge over the Artificer as they only need the one expertise to max their bonus, and have access to more easily obtained musical instrument proficiencies, as well as being naturally Charisma focused.
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.
... There is no "significant Sacrifice" to be made. ...
For an artificer to gain proficiencies in performance and a musical instrument it would seem that they'd need not to have used their efforts to take up options in something like a different skill and tool. I'd certainly consider this a significant sacrifice, as I think would gaining a bard rivalling level of charisma. If you don't view things that way, fair enough. I used a subjectively applied term. I'll accept the point of view as personal.
music is much more broad than just musical instruments. your taking that broadness and conflating it to the same thing as musical instruments instead of an overlap of ability. The music spoken of in performance could just as easily be singing rather than playing a musical instrument. There are also other forms of music that work without musical instruments as well. But this is not surprising considering that Music is actually one of the oldest forms of entertainment.
Tapping out a rhythm as you mentioned, while quite musical and would qualify for performance, is not the same thing as knowing the in's and out's of playing a drum and how to get different sounds out of it. Despite seeming fundamentally similar on a basic level there are some details of form there that do not mutually cross over very easily, or fill you in on the nuances to playing the harp. The best you can do is fake it with the musical instruments and hope your skill at everything else is more than enough to cover up for the fact that the instruments aren't really adding anything.
... There is no "significant Sacrifice" to be made. ...
For an artificer to gain proficiencies in performance and a musical instrument it would seem that they'd need not to have used their efforts to take up options in something like a different skill and tool. I'd certainly consider this a significant sacrifice, as I think would gaining a bard rivalling level of charisma. If you don't view things that way, fair enough. I used a subjectively applied term. I'll accept the point of view as personal.
This is not true. Proficiency in Tools is one of the easiest things to pick up that there is. And any artificer would then automatically become a specialized expert in them as well once they reach level 6. There is no "needs to have sacrificed learning some other tool" about it. You can get tool proficiencies from more than just something like a feat or character creation so you can always learn that other tool quite easily with just a little downtime, a little gold, and usually a short conversation with the DM about what your doing. On top of that. The Artificer is always guaranteed to get the proper tool proficiency for whatever subclass focus they take at level 3. So they are never going to go without their most important tool proficiency at any point, So it's almost worth it for them to pick things that don't match what they are going to get from their subclass, like a musical instrument or two, when it comes to their background instead of doubling up and having to switch it anyway (which could still be to a musical instrument interestingly enough).
And high charisma is ridiculously easy to get on anything that mostly only needs a single attribute. Just ask any rogue. Many of which I've seen over time take High Charisma to match with their High Dexterity because Charisma based skills are useful in a lot of kinds of criminal works and con jobs. They might not get it at the exact same levels as the Bard. But that was never stated as a necessity to begin with. But they certainly could if they wanted to. Particularly since the Artificer is primarily a support caster it means that they have a surprising number of spells that do not actually need a high intelligence to make a lot of use of. So the Artificer easily could choose to pick up Charisma first if they really wanted.
Intelligence does do things like limit the number of spells you could know. Or the level of spells you could cast once you get to a certain level, but interestingly one of those problems never really goes away, (the number of spells known) and the other isn't really an issue as long as you at least have something in intelligence until you get in the range of about level 12, Certain subclass abilities not withstanding, and your flash of genius... but flash of genius is real limited use even with the best intelligence and any bonus of +2 or higher is significant on many rolls you'd apply it to while at the same time having the potential to not consistently be make or break of passing a check even with a +5 on things you'd really want the +5 for.
The Weirdest thing about Artificers is thanks to their magic item style infusions. Granted you can't get some things until like level 10 or perhaps level 14. But if you can't make it that far. There are several infusions available that copy magic items that are basically designed to cover for sub par or neglected stats. Including intelligence, strength, and constitution. Which lowers their stat dependence in certain stats even more, if you can just find ways to live with them being potentially subpar until then. And with infusions like enhanced weapon, enhanced defense, enhanced shield, and enhanced arcane focus... you kind of have ways to work your way around some other stat issues to get to that point with some clever choices and switching out of infusions.
It all just ends up making Artificers a class you can tinker in lots of directions depending on what your after, and how you work the character. specially with tool proficiencies learnable for a bit of gold, the ability to make any tool you want with just a little time, and expertise with any tool you happen to be proficient in.
music is much more broad than just musical instruments. your taking that broadness and conflating it to the same thing as musical instruments instead of an overlap of ability.
Not really; to put it more simply it boils down to this:
Performance is the delivery, and knowing how to entertain, it might also just be knowing the tune/song well enough in the first place; or rather to do these things to a superior degree (as with most things in D&D, anybody can try).
Musical instrument proficiency is knowing how to play the instrument well; just as anybody can swing a sword in D&D, anybody can attempt to play a musical instrument, but proficiency is going to make it a lot more likely you'll succeed.
Put another way, if you can play an instrument but don't really know any songs, or don't know how to play them to entertain, then your performance will be limited. Think Commander Data (android) in The Next Generation trying to play music; his performances are technically perfect, but they lack any of the emotion, flair or substance to make them truly entertaining or unique. Without that something extra they might as well just be recordings.
Unless your goal is simply to reproduce a tune, then some amount of performance is usually going to be required. If what you want to perform is a song then the instrument is actually secondary (it's more the voice, the song itself and the delivery), so it's sufficient to just strum along to liven it up a bit, if you're proficient in performance then you should be able to do basic strumming/rhythm at the very least. But if you are proficient in both, then the instrument can be a more integral part; you can drop in those sick lute solos to really liven it up, you can play something more complex that fully supports the song in all the key moments and so-on.
What matters is what you're trying to achieve; if you just say "I play my lute" then a straight check with the tool proficiency is probably fine, but if you say "I want to entertain the crowd with music" then Performance is the correct check to call for, musical instrument proficiency is a supporting feature that can lend proficiency if you have none, or advantage if you do. In general the cases where you're called upon to only use the instrument are relatively rare, e.g- maybe if you're drafted in as part of a band with the sheet music provided or whatever, otherwise performance is going to be the more crucial part of the equation. A DM could rule that a lack of instrument proficiency is enough to hinder, but that's not really how the rules work in D&D (technically anyone can pick up a pair of bagpipes and roll a 20 to use them).
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.
... There is no "significant Sacrifice" to be made. ...
For an artificer to gain proficiencies in performance and a musical instrument it would seem that they'd need not to have used their efforts to take up options in something like a different skill and tool. I'd certainly consider this a significant sacrifice, as I think would gaining a bard rivalling level of charisma. If you don't view things that way, fair enough. I used a subjectively applied term. I'll accept the point of view as personal.
This is not true. Proficiency in Tools is one of the easiest things to pick up that there is. And any artificer would then automatically become a specialized expert in them as well once they reach level 6. There is no "needs to have sacrificed learning some other tool" about it. You can get tool proficiencies from more than just something like a feat or character creation so you can always learn that other tool quite easily with just a little downtime, a little gold, and usually a short conversation with the DM about what your doing. On top of that. The Artificer is always guaranteed to get the proper tool proficiency for whatever subclass focus they take at level 3. So they are never going to go without their most important tool proficiency at any point, So it's almost worth it for them to pick things that don't match what they are going to get from their subclass, like a musical instrument or two, when it comes to their background instead of doubling up and having to switch it anyway (which could still be to a musical instrument interestingly enough).
And high charisma is ridiculously easy to get on anything that mostly only needs a single attribute. Just ask any rogue. Many of which I've seen over time take High Charisma to match with their High Dexterity because Charisma based skills are useful in a lot of kinds of criminal works and con jobs. They might not get it at the exact same levels as the Bard. But that was never stated as a necessity to begin with. But they certainly could if they wanted to. Particularly since the Artificer is primarily a support caster it means that they have a surprising number of spells that do not actually need a high intelligence to make a lot of use of. So the Artificer easily could choose to pick up Charisma first if they really wanted.
Intelligence does do things like limit the number of spells you could know. Or the level of spells you could cast once you get to a certain level, but interestingly one of those problems never really goes away, (the number of spells known) and the other isn't really an issue as long as you at least have something in intelligence until you get in the range of about level 12, Certain subclass abilities not withstanding, and your flash of genius... but flash of genius is real limited use even with the best intelligence and any bonus of +2 or higher is significant on many rolls you'd apply it to while at the same time having the potential to not consistently be make or break of passing a check even with a +5 on things you'd really want the +5 for.
The Weirdest thing about Artificers is thanks to their magic item style infusions. Granted you can't get some things until like level 10 or perhaps level 14. But if you can't make it that far. There are several infusions available that copy magic items that are basically designed to cover for sub par or neglected stats. Including intelligence, strength, and constitution. Which lowers their stat dependence in certain stats even more, if you can just find ways to live with them being potentially subpar until then. And with infusions like enhanced weapon, enhanced defense, enhanced shield, and enhanced arcane focus... you kind of have ways to work your way around some other stat issues to get to that point with some clever choices and switching out of infusions.
It all just ends up making Artificers a class you can tinker in lots of directions depending on what your after, and how you work the character. specially with tool proficiencies learnable for a bit of gold, the ability to make any tool you want with just a little time, and expertise with any tool you happen to be proficient in.
Thanks for this.
I find it really weird that, after entire backgrounds may, at best, provide two tool proficiencies, that the PHb presents this:
It seems even weirder to me that the training for tools proficiencies text first says that "The DM determines how long it takes, and whether one or more ability checks are required" but then says "The training lasts for 250 days and costs 1 gp per day."
Personally, I'd go with the "DM determines" version according to my personal view that learning consecutive tool proficiencies in just 250 days is nuts. It seems to me to be particularly at odds with other schemes of gaining experience in d&d where character levels are progressively harder to attain.
In another formulation Adventurer's League specifies:
DOWNTIME You earn 10 downtime days between each adventure. Your character can participate in downtime activities between adventures as listed under “Downtime Activities” in the Player’s Handbook. The following additional downtime activities are available; all others are unavailable unless offered in an adventure.
In my view any utilisation of these downtime days could constitute a "significant sacrifice".
In my view any utilisation of these downtime days could constitute a "significant sacrifice".
Yeah, while training in additional tool proficiencies is an option, Fateless is underestimating the difficulty of doing so a bit, unless their DM's are handing them out like candy?
I mean, your average adventure may not represent all that long a span of time, most of which will be adventuring, and don't exactly give you a wealth of opportunities to learn new instruments; you're not likely to find anywhere to learn one in Barovia during Curse of Strahd, and it might be hard to find any in the Jungles of Chult during Tomb of Annihilation and so-on.
In the groups I've played the only extra training we've had was mission specific (so DM granted it as a matter of a few days at extra expense to learn just how to play Your Beardy Wife for a magic door), otherwise we occasionally get a few days of time between discrete quest segments, but a lot of that is "on the road" or not necessarily at a fully equipped city where we can find anything we could possibly want, so not necessarily ideal for training unless your DM allows books to count.
So definitely not a simple or trivial thing to acquire unless your DM makes it so; for the suggested system, while 250 gp might be chump change at higher levels, 250 days is not.
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.
..., Fateless is underestimating the difficulty of doing so a bit, unless their DM's are handing them out like candy? ...
But, RAW, that's certainly something a DM is at liberty to do.
If you're not going by something like Adventurer's League rules, a player just needs to gather the cash and ask. The elven wizard takes a 'quick' 13,000 day off and pays 13,000 gp and they'd get 6 standard languages (to add to their common and elven), 8 exotic languages, 24 tools, 3 game types and 10 musical instruments. RAW, all they have to do is ask and I thank Fateless for opening my eyes to this. (In my understanding artificers might additionally be really good at raking in the cash on other downtime days with the effect that, RAW, this could all start from level 1).
The situation for my Tortle Druid, who often finds it hard to get a long rest let alone downtime days, is very different.
The potential disparity between DM approaches would make a significant difference in situations in which tools expertise was a possibility.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
didn't read full thread but i love tool expertise. particluarly with the new All Purpose Tool.
Effectively.. if I use a feat or varietn racial hertiage I can get good skills with all the tools. Which really lets me be the
"item master class" It really helps fulfil my fantasy~ Similar to how a Bard is a jack of all trades or rogue is the "hyper skilled focused, whose reliable"
hey peeps, permafunk here for those looking for a solid answer amongst the arguing, I think the consensus is that having all tools (vehicles/gaming sets/instruments included) be effected by this ability makes sense because artificers (in the nicest way possible) are nerds.
An Artisan proficiency? Well its obvious, you make things, that's kinda the whole class.
A Game Set proficiency? You've had sleepless nights practicing against a small chess-playing mechanism (à la "The Turk") that you made.
A Vehicle proficiency? As said in the convo already, you're a bike-nut, and are a big fan of locomotion.
An Instrument proficiency? There's just something about how pianos work that just UGH, you love that s***.
in the case of an instrument (which seems to be a worry near the start of the convo) proficiency in it DOES indeed mean you know how to play it, but that doesn't mean you can out perform the bard, after all that would be a performance check which is charisma based. (And if you, the artificer, have better charisma than the bard, well then you'd probably be better at it even without the expertise.)
a easier way to visualise this difference in the bard and artificers abilities would be the bards ability to MAKE music, yes the arti can PLAY the instrument, but proficiency in an instrument doesn't mean you can write or improvise a song, put the arti in an orchestra and they do fine, but in the middle of an inn full of people waiting for a fabulous impromptu performance, they'd be lacking. however on the flipside, if it came to keeping that instrument well kept, knowing how its made, how it works or repairing it, the artificer would probably know more.
tl;dr: artificers aren't experts in a skill that requires cunning or some level of street smarts, like reading people or sneaking around, they're experts in fabricated things, things that are logical and mechanical, that have rules to them, so it makes sense that they have the ability to be experts at more than just artisan tools.
tl;dr tl;dr: artificers are nerds
Some food for thought. Theme your artificer, as it will justify a lot of tool proficiencies, make them more fun, and more versatile. Artificer’s can get a lot of proficient tools depending on race and background. This can create a lot of flavor, and a character than feels more like a unique class at times than just an artificer. For example, I made a Warforged artificer that was built to be the ultimate sailor, so he had the sailor background. Thanks to that, his racial tool proficiency choice and proficiencies from the artificer class, he ended up with proficiency in almost every tool I could think of that he’d need to maintain and sail a ship.
TLDR: You can justify a lot of tool proficiencies via a character theme that makes them not just an artisan of a craft.
I really don't see a problem here. DnD is NOT a reality similator. It shouldn't be one.
The Artificer is the class with the "uses stuff" trope.
When an Artificer makes food
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErDkRerNKvQ
When a halfling chef makes food
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNq5c1Rj0tk
I don't think that there's a problem with an artificer gaining technical expertise with a musical instrument above non-artificers generally.
If anything the problem is with bards that they don't receive a parallel form of musical instrument expertise.
If a player asked me if they could add this extra expertise at 3rd level I'd certainly say yes.
Also, if a player's 6th level artificer had proficiency in a musical instrument with expertise, I might assume that bards of at least a similar level had a similar level of musical instrument expertise. But this may depend on whether I thought bards could be under threat.
In many cases, an artificer's performance skill may be hampered by a comparatively moderate artificer relevant level of charisma. Bards may be challenged by a rare artificer with proficiency with a limited number of musical instruments but, with their base of three musical instrument proficiencies, might only very rarely be outshone.
Personally, I'd rule that a Bard can gain a proficiency in a new musical instrument in 1d20 - class level days for free to a minimum of 1 day.
I do think that Artificers probably weren't intended to be proficient in musical instruments, and whoever wrote the rules forgot they're included in tools. It probably should have been limited to Thieves' Tools, Tinker's Tools and artisan's tools (like the base proficiencies).
However, you arguably don't need expertise in a musical instrument as a Bard; take the expertise in Performance, then use a musical instrument proficiency to gain advantage. It's not a well specified part of tool usage (major failure in the rules IMO) but Xanathar's Guide to Everything makes it pretty clear that this is how it's intended to work as it's a skill that clearly combines with a tool, which not every tool does.
In this way to gain the same benefit as the Bard the Artificer has to take performance proficiency, otherwise they just have the expertise only (no advantage), and only in as many instruments as they can gain proficiency for. A Bard with Performance expertise meanwhile effectively has expertise even in instruments they don't specifically have training in, but advantage with the ones that they do.
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 mean again, the artificer is the master of the magic of stuff generally, infusing magic into mundane items, and you can infuse a pair of "pipes of the sewers" to cast spells using a musical instrument. Plus that short list you said would also exlude poisoner's kit, disguise kit and herbalisim kit, all of whom i would safely say should have this bonus included, same arguably goes for Navigator's Tools (you already get cartographer's applied, why not these?) and the forgery kit (calligrapher's supplies, but not these?). It is faster and easier just to say all tools and dealing with the fun stuff that comes afterwards than to come up with a set list of tools it applies to like a fun limiter
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
I'd add in the fact that Perfomance is not necessarily just effectively proficiency in all musical instruments. Performance covers a lot of things but it does not necessarily automatically give you knowledge into how to play a tuba or a harp with any real skill. Which effectively makes knowledge in those instruments just that much more valuable rather than trying to always find reasons to discount them.
Xanathar's just adds to the idea of seperate but somewhat overlapping. A musical instrument can certainly be used in a performance... but Much of performance doesn't touch on playing musical instruments and more incorporates an outside knowledge into certain aspects of it. This is why Bards ALL come with Three Musical Instruments that they know. On top of their performance abilities, and even ability to Expertise in it. It's incorporating that outside knowledge. The tool knowledge for musical instruments is so ingrained into bards that even bards that don't particularly do musical stuff performance wise still uses musical instruments to cast their magic in 5e. The magical instruments are their spell casting focus for the class.
The description of 5e Artificers begins, "Masters of invention, artificers use ingenuity and magic to unlock extraordinary capabilities in objects." Some may think it's strange that we then find that artificers have no special power with non-magical invention. Some might consider this lack, a little silly but that, RAW, is just the way it is.
We read, perhaps in parallel, that "The bard is a master of song, speech, and the magic they contain". Some may think it's strange that we then find that bards have no special power with non-magical performance skills but, RAW, that's just the way it is.
What I do think is that it is strange the imbalance where artificers can gain expertise with musical instruments while bards can't. If WotC agree they might rebalance in 6e.
This kind of thing certainly fits a fair RAI interpretation:
The proficiencies of artificers include Tools: Thieves' tools, tinker's tools, one type of artisan's tools of your choice and yet class features of artificers include Tool Expertise: Starting at 6th level, your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses your proficiency with a tool.
However, it's also possible that they simply intended artificers to be basically good at stuff. In this case, I think that a broader question might be asked: should it be possible for anyone to gain expertise in music at all? If no then an appropriate option might be to nerf the artificer. If yes then it might be more suitable, in some way/ways, to buff the bard.
Remember that an artificer would be making a significant sacrifice to take on a musical instrument and performance proficiency whilst also buffing charisma. If an artificer does all this and if it's possible to gain musical instrument expertise, who knows, maybe they'd be good.
An Artificer is highly Single Attribute Dependent. maybe requiring a bit of Con if your really determined to do something like a tanking role. But otherwise it is not a significant sacrifice to gain charisma buffs, or to gain performance Proficiency since there are something like 5 backgrounds that you can get it from. Such as Entertainer, Gladiator, or Ginner just to name 3. But I know there are more.
The bard can also pick up a 4th musical instrument from a number of different backgrounds as well. So they aren't hard set limited to three instruments. They just have a minimum of 3.
On top of that both of them can learn such things in their downtime for the cost of 250 gold which cannot be ignored.
So No. There is no "significant Sacrifice" to be made. They are fairly easily obtainable from both sides.
I'd still make the same argument actually; none of these exactly screams "an artificer would be naturally better at this" to me, though an Alchemist certainly might be the edge case for Alchemist's Supplies and a Poisoner's Kit, but should an Artificer be able to get free expertise in Disguise Kit etc.? I'm not sure personally as they don't fall under the same kind of crafting that's emphasised by the class.
While you could absolutely argue that they could invent something to make these things easier/better (and I'd agree with you), I feel like that would be better covered by a tool infusion, an expansion of Magical Tinkering, or some other specific ability rather than blanket expertise over everything. As much as I love the class, one of my biggest criticisms of it is that mechanically it's built for zero effort; while you can (and should) add extra steps to emphasise that your character isn't simply being granted bonuses, but rather earning them through hard work, the Tools Expertise is IMO one of the lazier features that doesn't feel right when you expand it out too far (i.e- beyond clear crafting tools).
While calligrapher's tools vs. forgery kit and cartographer's tools vs. navigators tools may seem odd at first glance, the distinction makes sense; forgery implies copying rather than creation/invention, and likewise navigating is following a course, not setting it. Again this is why I don't think a blanket expertise is the best way to handle it, as while an artificer could probably invent something to do forgery or navigation more easily, it should be by making the tools more specialised, not allowing you to just pick up any navigator's tools and be better than the owner is at using them.
It actually kind of is:
Now if your goal is to play a viol at a competition level then obviously, yeah, proficiency in the instrument itself is probably going to be required. But if you're just trying to entertain then that's straight performance, as you don't necessarily have to be any good with an instrument to entertain people with it; your DM might rule differently for an instrument that's completely outlandish compared to what you have proficiency in, but if you're proficient with a lute then you should be able to carry a basic tune on another stringed instrument enough to perform, even if it's not quite as technically impressive as one you're fully proficient in (that's where the overlapping proficiencies come in).
I guess technically you might not be entertaining with the instrument as such doing it this way; it may be more the tune or a song you're accompanying with it that is the real entertainment value, or some other showmanship or such. But outside of more specialist circles you should be able to entertain with one even if you're not proficient. Someone who can't play a drum at an expert level can still use one to tap out a rhythm etc.
Besides, your average Bard has access to a lot of musical instrument proficiencies to stack together for advantage as well; they get three as standard from the class, and if you want to emphasise it you can pick up two more with a background unless you'd prefer a crafting tool or language instead. So I'd argue they still have something of an edge over the Artificer as they only need the one expertise to max their bonus, and have access to more easily obtained musical instrument proficiencies, as well as being naturally Charisma focused.
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.
For an artificer to gain proficiencies in performance and a musical instrument it would seem that they'd need not to have used their efforts to take up options in something like a different skill and tool. I'd certainly consider this a significant sacrifice, as I think would gaining a bard rivalling level of charisma. If you don't view things that way, fair enough. I used a subjectively applied term. I'll accept the point of view as personal.
music is much more broad than just musical instruments. your taking that broadness and conflating it to the same thing as musical instruments instead of an overlap of ability. The music spoken of in performance could just as easily be singing rather than playing a musical instrument. There are also other forms of music that work without musical instruments as well. But this is not surprising considering that Music is actually one of the oldest forms of entertainment.
Tapping out a rhythm as you mentioned, while quite musical and would qualify for performance, is not the same thing as knowing the in's and out's of playing a drum and how to get different sounds out of it. Despite seeming fundamentally similar on a basic level there are some details of form there that do not mutually cross over very easily, or fill you in on the nuances to playing the harp. The best you can do is fake it with the musical instruments and hope your skill at everything else is more than enough to cover up for the fact that the instruments aren't really adding anything.
No I'm not. I'm talking about a person that has performance skill, high charisma and both musical instrument proficiency and expertise.
I'm not suggesting that an artificer could have expertise in singing other than if, say, a broadly available feat was made available for it
This is not true. Proficiency in Tools is one of the easiest things to pick up that there is. And any artificer would then automatically become a specialized expert in them as well once they reach level 6. There is no "needs to have sacrificed learning some other tool" about it. You can get tool proficiencies from more than just something like a feat or character creation so you can always learn that other tool quite easily with just a little downtime, a little gold, and usually a short conversation with the DM about what your doing. On top of that. The Artificer is always guaranteed to get the proper tool proficiency for whatever subclass focus they take at level 3. So they are never going to go without their most important tool proficiency at any point, So it's almost worth it for them to pick things that don't match what they are going to get from their subclass, like a musical instrument or two, when it comes to their background instead of doubling up and having to switch it anyway (which could still be to a musical instrument interestingly enough).
And high charisma is ridiculously easy to get on anything that mostly only needs a single attribute. Just ask any rogue. Many of which I've seen over time take High Charisma to match with their High Dexterity because Charisma based skills are useful in a lot of kinds of criminal works and con jobs. They might not get it at the exact same levels as the Bard. But that was never stated as a necessity to begin with. But they certainly could if they wanted to. Particularly since the Artificer is primarily a support caster it means that they have a surprising number of spells that do not actually need a high intelligence to make a lot of use of. So the Artificer easily could choose to pick up Charisma first if they really wanted.
Intelligence does do things like limit the number of spells you could know. Or the level of spells you could cast once you get to a certain level, but interestingly one of those problems never really goes away, (the number of spells known) and the other isn't really an issue as long as you at least have something in intelligence until you get in the range of about level 12, Certain subclass abilities not withstanding, and your flash of genius... but flash of genius is real limited use even with the best intelligence and any bonus of +2 or higher is significant on many rolls you'd apply it to while at the same time having the potential to not consistently be make or break of passing a check even with a +5 on things you'd really want the +5 for.
The Weirdest thing about Artificers is thanks to their magic item style infusions. Granted you can't get some things until like level 10 or perhaps level 14. But if you can't make it that far. There are several infusions available that copy magic items that are basically designed to cover for sub par or neglected stats. Including intelligence, strength, and constitution. Which lowers their stat dependence in certain stats even more, if you can just find ways to live with them being potentially subpar until then. And with infusions like enhanced weapon, enhanced defense, enhanced shield, and enhanced arcane focus... you kind of have ways to work your way around some other stat issues to get to that point with some clever choices and switching out of infusions.
It all just ends up making Artificers a class you can tinker in lots of directions depending on what your after, and how you work the character. specially with tool proficiencies learnable for a bit of gold, the ability to make any tool you want with just a little time, and expertise with any tool you happen to be proficient in.
I think he was replying to me rather than you (this is why one must always quote at least some part of what one is responding to, heh).
Not really; to put it more simply it boils down to this:
Put another way, if you can play an instrument but don't really know any songs, or don't know how to play them to entertain, then your performance will be limited. Think Commander Data (android) in The Next Generation trying to play music; his performances are technically perfect, but they lack any of the emotion, flair or substance to make them truly entertaining or unique. Without that something extra they might as well just be recordings.
Unless your goal is simply to reproduce a tune, then some amount of performance is usually going to be required. If what you want to perform is a song then the instrument is actually secondary (it's more the voice, the song itself and the delivery), so it's sufficient to just strum along to liven it up a bit, if you're proficient in performance then you should be able to do basic strumming/rhythm at the very least. But if you are proficient in both, then the instrument can be a more integral part; you can drop in those sick lute solos to really liven it up, you can play something more complex that fully supports the song in all the key moments and so-on.
What matters is what you're trying to achieve; if you just say "I play my lute" then a straight check with the tool proficiency is probably fine, but if you say "I want to entertain the crowd with music" then Performance is the correct check to call for, musical instrument proficiency is a supporting feature that can lend proficiency if you have none, or advantage if you do. In general the cases where you're called upon to only use the instrument are relatively rare, e.g- maybe if you're drafted in as part of a band with the sheet music provided or whatever, otherwise performance is going to be the more crucial part of the equation. A DM could rule that a lack of instrument proficiency is enough to hinder, but that's not really how the rules work in D&D (technically anyone can pick up a pair of bagpipes and roll a 20 to use them).
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.
Thanks for this.
I find it really weird that, after entire backgrounds may, at best, provide two tool proficiencies, that the PHb presents this:
It seems even weirder to me that the training for tools proficiencies text first says that "The DM determines how long it takes, and whether one or more ability checks are required" but then says "The training lasts for 250 days and costs 1 gp per day."
Personally, I'd go with the "DM determines" version according to my personal view that learning consecutive tool proficiencies in just 250 days is nuts. It seems to me to be particularly at odds with other schemes of gaining experience in d&d where character levels are progressively harder to attain.
In another formulation Adventurer's League specifies:
DOWNTIME
You earn 10 downtime days between each adventure. Your
character can participate in downtime activities between
adventures as listed under “Downtime Activities” in the
Player’s Handbook. The following additional downtime
activities are available; all others are unavailable unless
offered in an adventure.
In my view any utilisation of these downtime days could constitute a "significant sacrifice".
Yeah, while training in additional tool proficiencies is an option, Fateless is underestimating the difficulty of doing so a bit, unless their DM's are handing them out like candy?
I mean, your average adventure may not represent all that long a span of time, most of which will be adventuring, and don't exactly give you a wealth of opportunities to learn new instruments; you're not likely to find anywhere to learn one in Barovia during Curse of Strahd, and it might be hard to find any in the Jungles of Chult during Tomb of Annihilation and so-on.
In the groups I've played the only extra training we've had was mission specific (so DM granted it as a matter of a few days at extra expense to learn just how to play Your Beardy Wife for a magic door), otherwise we occasionally get a few days of time between discrete quest segments, but a lot of that is "on the road" or not necessarily at a fully equipped city where we can find anything we could possibly want, so not necessarily ideal for training unless your DM allows books to count.
So definitely not a simple or trivial thing to acquire unless your DM makes it so; for the suggested system, while 250 gp might be chump change at higher levels, 250 days is not.
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.
But, RAW, that's certainly something a DM is at liberty to do.
If you're not going by something like Adventurer's League rules, a player just needs to gather the cash and ask. The elven wizard takes a 'quick' 13,000 day off and pays 13,000 gp and they'd get 6 standard languages (to add to their common and elven), 8 exotic languages, 24 tools, 3 game types and 10 musical instruments. RAW, all they have to do is ask and I thank Fateless for opening my eyes to this. (In my understanding artificers might additionally be really good at raking in the cash on other downtime days with the effect that, RAW, this could all start from level 1).
The situation for my Tortle Druid, who often finds it hard to get a long rest let alone downtime days, is very different.
The potential disparity between DM approaches would make a significant difference in situations in which tools expertise was a possibility.