I am confused by the bonuses granted by Might of the Master.
At level 3, my Battle Smith Artificer gets a Steel Defender. Its Force-Empowered Rend starts at +4 to hit. When I reach Level 5, my proficiency bonus rises from 2 to 3. So the Force-Empowered Rend is now +5 to hit. I think I'm correct so far.
Now I'm at Level 6, and I've unlocked the Homunculus Servant infusion. The Homunculus Servant has the same ability, Might of the Master. However, because my proficiency bonus was 3 when it was unlocked, does its Force Strike start at +4 to hit? Or did it rise to +5?
That ability is extremly poorly written, and it should be errataed!
It's not only "what if i unlock that feature later, when i already have a higher proficiency".
You could also ask "What if i level up at a time, when my steal defender/homunculus is dead?"
Since it is an Ability of the creature, you could also interpret, that there needs to be a creature to be in existence, so that it can be triggered.
It would be a lot easier, to present the Statblock of the creature without any bonuses, and make the +X feature part of the class instead of the creature itself.
I really hope it gets errataed at some point. hopefully, when a new artificer subclass gets released.
Might of the Master is an extremely poorly written feature. The creature should simply say "add your proficiency bonus to [X]", and have its base numbers adjusted to suit. That would clean up all this confusion. As it stands, any DM who's worthy of her position behind the screen will interpret MotM to mean that the creature's base abilities are increased in line with the character's proficiency bonus, NOT that the critter has to specifically be there and alive when you level up or it stays stuck at its base stats forever. After all, if that was the case then any time you made a new Steel Defender or Homunculus to replace a destroyed critter it'd lose its MotM bonus, which is clearly not intended.
of course it's not intended that way. but a DM shouldn't be the one, to interpret rule texts, but to simply understand them.
that is actually the great part of dnd5. it's not how popular dnd is, but how exact the rules are written. there are so many other TTRPG's out there, that are a lot worse with this.
it was so refreshing, coming from vampire v20, to actually get a working ruleset. in V20, you can argue hours with other people, how the rules are meant to be. In 5e, you have at least always a sense on how they are intended to be. In V20, nobody knew...
Gonna have to disagree with you fiercely there, Mahe. A good, clean rule system certainly helps, but it is absolutely a DM's job to interpret rules and make calls on the fly. DMs aren't game consoles, mindlessly running code. If that's all your DM does, you need a new DM.
Of yourse it's the DM's job to interpret the rules. maybe i phrased that really badly.
Let me rephrase that.
It's best, if the DM needs als little time as possible, to interpret rules, so that when a rules discussion happens, it can be resolved as quickly and as easily as possible.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am confused by the bonuses granted by Might of the Master.
At level 3, my Battle Smith Artificer gets a Steel Defender. Its Force-Empowered Rend starts at +4 to hit. When I reach Level 5, my proficiency bonus rises from 2 to 3. So the Force-Empowered Rend is now +5 to hit. I think I'm correct so far.
Now I'm at Level 6, and I've unlocked the Homunculus Servant infusion. The Homunculus Servant has the same ability, Might of the Master. However, because my proficiency bonus was 3 when it was unlocked, does its Force Strike start at +4 to hit? Or did it rise to +5?
I imagine that's oversight from when the Homunculus was an Alchemist level 3 feature.
I'd rule it's also at +5.
That ability is extremly poorly written, and it should be errataed!
It's not only "what if i unlock that feature later, when i already have a higher proficiency".
You could also ask "What if i level up at a time, when my steal defender/homunculus is dead?"
Since it is an Ability of the creature, you could also interpret, that there needs to be a creature to be in existence, so that it can be triggered.
It would be a lot easier, to present the Statblock of the creature without any bonuses, and make the +X feature part of the class instead of the creature itself.
I really hope it gets errataed at some point. hopefully, when a new artificer subclass gets released.
Might of the Master is an extremely poorly written feature. The creature should simply say "add your proficiency bonus to [X]", and have its base numbers adjusted to suit. That would clean up all this confusion. As it stands, any DM who's worthy of her position behind the screen will interpret MotM to mean that the creature's base abilities are increased in line with the character's proficiency bonus, NOT that the critter has to specifically be there and alive when you level up or it stays stuck at its base stats forever. After all, if that was the case then any time you made a new Steel Defender or Homunculus to replace a destroyed critter it'd lose its MotM bonus, which is clearly not intended.
Please do not contact or message me.
of course it's not intended that way. but a DM shouldn't be the one, to interpret rule texts, but to simply understand them.
that is actually the great part of dnd5. it's not how popular dnd is, but how exact the rules are written. there are so many other TTRPG's out there, that are a lot worse with this.
it was so refreshing, coming from vampire v20, to actually get a working ruleset. in V20, you can argue hours with other people, how the rules are meant to be. In 5e, you have at least always a sense on how they are intended to be. In V20, nobody knew...
Gonna have to disagree with you fiercely there, Mahe. A good, clean rule system certainly helps, but it is absolutely a DM's job to interpret rules and make calls on the fly. DMs aren't game consoles, mindlessly running code. If that's all your DM does, you need a new DM.
Please do not contact or message me.
Of yourse it's the DM's job to interpret the rules. maybe i phrased that really badly.
Let me rephrase that.
It's best, if the DM needs als little time as possible, to interpret rules, so that when a rules discussion happens, it can be resolved as quickly and as easily as possible.