My players and I have been discussing a new Armorer Artificer rule. Here is the train of thought -
As a general rule for Artificer,
"Infusing an Item -Whenever you finish a long rest, you can touch a nonmagical object and imbue it with one of your artificer infusions, turning it into a magic item. An infusion works on only certain kinds of objects, as specified in the infusion’s description."
But the Armorer Subclass specifies,
"Arcane Armor 3rd-level Armorer feature Your metallurgical pursuits have led to you making armor a conduit for your magic. As an action, you can turn a suit of armor you are wearing into Arcane Armor, provided you have smith’s tools in hand."
,which would allow for Magic Armor to be used as Arcane Armor. Then at ninth level, there is Armor Mod,
"Armor Modifications 9th-level Armorer feature You learn how to use your artificer infusions to specially modify your Arcane Armor. That armor now counts as separate items for the purposes of your Infuse Items feature: armor (the chest piece), boots, helmet, and the armor’s special weapon. Each of those items can bear one of your infusions, and the infusions transfer over if you change your armor’s model with the Armor Model feature. In addition, the maximum number of items you can infuse at once increases by 2, but those extra items must be part of your Arcane Armor."
Our understanding is that this would create a specific exemption to Infusing an item's "nonmagical" restriction so long as the infusions are part of the Arcane Armor.
Of course, I'm sure this is RAW rather than RAI, but I want to know if anyone is seeing the same thing as me or if I've missed a rule somewhere. If not I'm inclined to allow Rules as Written.
We've actually already had an entire discussion about this in the thread called and as far Armorer and Magic Armor as I can tell no one has been able to give a definite answer. A few bring up that it's specific versus general. The Armorer's ability being the specific that trumps the general rule about infusions. Others disagree that the they're all magical items already so none of them will be able to get an infusion.
My personal opinion and it maybe more of a compromise than actually following RAW, since it isn't the clearest here, is that the Armor remains magic and can't be infused while the other pieces are open to receiving infusions. So to me this means that the Chest piece (as it is the one labeled Armor) couldn't be infused as it has a magical ability and would be considered a magic item. The other pieces though are no longer considered Armor for the sake of this ability, and so while they are part of the magical armor, the Armorer's ability separates them into separate items no longer classified as armor so are not magical items and can be infused.
Until we get clarification from WotC though, this in the end would most likely just end up being the DM's choice on what he allows you to do.
The RAW is not unambiguous, which is annoying. But if the intent were that "each of those items can bear one of your infusions" override the proscription against infusing magic items, the text would actually say that. The intended function of the rule is to let you treat a single item as multiple items that you can infuse separately, nothing more.
So, can you turn magic armor into Arcane Armor and then infuse that magic armor?
RAW is an uncomfortable shrug (but on the preponderance of the evidence, no).
The feature does not say that a suit of armor becoming Arcane Armor turns into a magical suit of armor, so it is not a magical suit of armor and can be infused. As for if you can turn magical armor into Arcane Armor and then infuse it, not RAW. The armor doesn't stop being magical if it was previously magical. The level 9 armorer feature may override this by saying "Each of those items can bear one of your infusions", but that's pretty blatant rules-lawyering, and it isn't clear which rule is specific and which is general.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
An Armorer's armor is described as having magical capabilities, and both the Thundering Fists and Perfected Armor features are described as having magical effects. Being the feature is described as magical, as per the sage advice compendium, doesn't that mean Arcane Armor is, in fact, magical regardless of whether or not the armor was magical before becoming Arcane Armor?
Shouldn't that also mean that the level nine Armor Modification feature does allow the Infusion of Arcane Armor?
I'm pretty sure it's not supposed to let you infuse Magical Armor but I'd allow it at my table because otherwise you have no 9th level feature once you find a nice suit of adamantine plate, which I think is a perfect thing for an armorer anyway.
An Armorer's armor is described as having magical capabilities, and both the Thundering Fists and Perfected Armor features are described as having magical effects. Being the feature is described as magical, as per the sage advice compendium, doesn't that mean Arcane Armor is, in fact, magical regardless of whether or not the armor was magical before becoming Arcane Armor?
Shouldn't that also mean that the level nine Armor Modification feature does allow the Infusion of Arcane Armor?
No. The specific effects are magical; that doesn’t mean the armor is magical. The artificer can cast magic spells, but that doesn’t mean the artificer is magical. The spells don’t function within an anti-magic field, but the artificer doesn’t disappear.
I'm pretty sure it's not supposed to let you infuse Magical Armor but I'd allow it at my table because otherwise you have no 9th level feature once you find a nice suit of adamantine plate, which I think is a perfect thing for an armorer anyway.
That’s why I prefer to treat things like Adamantine and Mithral as nonmagic. I think they’re cooler as just special metals.
The feature does not say that a suit of armor becoming Arcane Armor turns into a magical suit of armor, so it is not a magical suit of armor and can be infused. As for if you can turn magical armor into Arcane Armor and then infuse it, not RAW. The armor doesn't stop being magical if it was previously magical. The level 9 armorer feature may override this by saying "Each of those items can bear one of your infusions", but that's pretty blatant rules-lawyering, and it isn't clear which rule is specific and which is general.
This is exactly what I’m getting at. It’s definitely some ambiguous rule lawyering and it’s not clear.
Arcane Armor can only be infused if it is nonmagical. This is no different than an artificer being unable to apply Radiant Weapon to a Holy Avenger, or Repeating Shot to an Oathbow. Armorers who wish to make full use of their Armor Modifications class feature need to use nonmagical armor to do so. This is not "unfair", it's simply how the artificer operates. One cannot temporarily imbue magic into an item that has been permanently imbued with other magic. If an Armorer finds an excellent suit of magical armor they wish to use, they will have to forego Armor Modifications.
Arcane Armor can only be infused if it is nonmagical. This is no different than an artificer being unable to apply Radiant Weapon to a Holy Avenger, or Repeating Shot to an Oathbow. Armorers who wish to make full use of their Armor Modifications class feature need to use nonmagical armor to do so. This is not "unfair", it's simply how the artificer operates. One cannot temporarily imbue magic into an item that has been permanently imbued with other magic. If an Armorer finds an excellent suit of magical armor they wish to use, they will have to forego Armor Modifications.
i would add to the issue that many Magical Armors are kind of a matter of what powers you want to be using anyway. Infusions just give you more options as to what magical affects you want your armor to have and there is the ability with one infusion to get yourself a base model +2 magic armor effectively. So it's only rarer or more powerful extra affects that might actually be worth heavily looking into. Particularly effects that the artificer can't replicate in some fashion anyway. Most of the possible base increase in armor class is already covered without specifically turning magical armor into your arcane armor.
The two things that everyone seems to be missing is 1) Under the 2nd level ability Infuse Items it states this: "You've gained the ability to imbue mundane items with certain magical infusions, turning those objects into magic items." 2) on page 7 of the PHB in the section about general vs specific states that the specific will overrule the general ruling, typically.
If we go RAW with no interpretation of the general vs specific (G vs S), then the 2nd level ability would make the 9th lvl Armor Modifications ability to be breaking the rules because infusions make items magical and you cannot infuse magical items. Thus the Armorer's 9th lvl ability cannot be used because the armor itself is magical no matter how many parts that it is broke up into. When you apply the first infusion into the armor the armor becomes magical. Arcane Armor in itself should make non magical armor magical simply based upon its description and how it changes the armor but that is another argument completely.
If we go the RAI route and take the G vs S from above and allow the Armor Modifications to infuse three additional aspects of the armor then this ruling by it's very nature allows magical armor to be infused simply because the 2nd level ability clearly states that infused items make a non magical item into a magical item. This would also allow any magic armor to be used in the Armor Modification feature. Keep in mind that this is the only place that it is specifically pointed out that the infusions that would include the armor after it is broken up, goes out of it's way to clarify that the chest piece counts as the armor infusion and the other three do not even though the "special weapon" portion could be one of a few options.
If there is any disagreeing on if regular magic armor can be infused, then I ask you how can a magical suit of armor be used as Arcane Armor at all? By allowing magical armor to become an Armorer's Arcane armor it is automatically changed by the 3rd lvl ability Armor Model. This ability clearly states that "Your metallurgical pursuits have led to you making armor a conduit for your magic. As an action, you can turn a suit of armor you are wearing into Arcane Armor, provided you have smith's tools in hand." While this does not state that this is an infusion at any time, it does state that you have to have your tools in hand as inferred by the nature of infusion. The Arcane Armor also automatically gives you some if not all the abilities of both mithral armor and the prosthetic limb. Both of which are magic items that I am sure no one will disagree with.
Not only that but the armor is now usable as your arcane focus, something that is normally restricted to only rods, staves and wands.
So if the Arcane Armor feature is not automatically magical even before any infusions are added, I ask why not as it duplicates existing magic items even at this very basic level. If it does count as magical then how can an existing magical armor be used as your Arcane Armor? If the feature can be used with magical armor then why can't the Armor Modification allow the armor to be "split up" into four pieces as far as infusions are concerned?
Going through all of this the one ruling that does answer all of these questions states that a specific ruling overrides the general ruling. Now I will admit the Armorer subclass takes this to a whole new level and adds numerous specific rules to its subclass, but at any rate the 9th level ability means one of two things, A) Armor Modification can't be used as it breaks the rules or B) Armor Modification is a rule exemption and allows magical armor to be infused, even if that means that only the other three parts can hold infusions.
A) Armor Modification can't be used as it breaks the rules or B) Armor Modification is a rule exemption and allows magical armor to be infused, even if that means that only the other three parts can hold infusions.
Or... Armor Modification does exactly what it says it does and is not a rules exemption to magical armor.
The "can't infuse magic items" rule is a pretty dumb design choice by WOTC, but the intent of the mechanics seems pretty clear.
The "can't infuse magic items" rule is a pretty dumb design choice by WOTC, but the intent of the mechanics seems pretty clear.
I have to disagree with you on that point. Stacking an infusions on preexisting magic items would get very out of hand very quickly if it was allowed. The attunement shenanigans alone are enough of a reason to nix that idea. If it weren’t RAW, it would likely be the most common houserule in 5e.
I have to disagree with you on that point. Stacking an infusions on preexisting magic items would get very out of hand very quickly if it was allowed. The attunement shenanigans alone are enough of a reason to nix that idea. If it weren’t RAW, it would likely be the most common houserule in 5e.
The problem is it makes artificers scale inversely with how magical the campaign is. The more items I hand out as a GM, the less they can infuse. I can never give our artificer a magic hand crossbow because if I do she can't auto-reload it anymore. That's pretty jank.
It also creates this nonsense where before anyone gets a magic weapon, the artificer gets a +1 to certain things as one of their class features... and then when I had out magic gear that bonus effectively goes away because now it's just equivalent to what everyone else has. Then if someone gets a +2 whatever, now the artificer is actually at -1 using their own tricks. What's the balance point there?
The point of my post was not to determine if things could/should/would get out of control. The point of the post was to bring all the evidence that I could find on it and present it. With the way it is written is that it either doesn't work at all or is borderline game breaking.
The point of my post was not to determine if things could/should/would get out of control. The point of the post was to bring all the evidence that I could find on it and present it. With the way it is written is that it either doesn't work at all or is borderline game breaking.
Except Neither of those are true.
It does work as written and it's not borderline game breaking. Your just taking two hyperbollic extreme's and forcing those on the situation. Taking one item and turning it into 4 Works just fine as it is written. All you have to do is think of it going from one single piece that cannot be separated into 4 individual interlocking pieces that can be seperated and thus hold 4 different infusions. This is actually far simpler than your making it out to be and it does not invalidate how things are worked or any rules and it does not turn the whole thing into some kind of game breaking mechanic. It just takes an object that cannot be suplemented by other magical items into one that can Just like others can have that's all.
I have to disagree with you on that point. Stacking an infusions on preexisting magic items would get very out of hand very quickly if it was allowed. The attunement shenanigans alone are enough of a reason to nix that idea. If it weren’t RAW, it would likely be the most common houserule in 5e.
The problem is it makes artificers scale inversely with how magical the campaign is. The more items I hand out as a GM, the less they can infuse. I can never give our artificer a magic hand crossbow because if I do she can't auto-reload it anymore. That's pretty jank.
It also creates this nonsense where before anyone gets a magic weapon, the artificer gets a +1 to certain things as one of their class features... and then when I had out magic gear that bonus effectively goes away because now it's just equivalent to what everyone else has. Then if someone gets a +2 whatever, now the artificer is actually at -1 using their own tricks. What's the balance point there?
It's a horrendous mechanic.
They do not scale inversely. Your making two bad assumptions.
The First assumption is that the Artificer wants the particular items your handing out. Which while you may tailor items to them many stories do not. So the Artificer now has the option to ignore many of the offered items and pick the exact ones they want which is actually an enhancement in benefit.
The Second Bad Assumption is that the Artificer Can only, and should only, use their Infusions for themselves and they are only part of their own power curve which is actually not true. If the Artificer does accept Magical Items gathered through the course of adventure. This free's up infusions that they can share with Party members. Helping them to Tailor things they use a bit more to what they are after rather than relying on the random drops as well. Because the Artificer is a support class and infusions are designed to be used to benefit more than just themselves but potentially other party members as well.
And your Complaints about +1's are kind of hollow. There are other things that give the equivalent of +1's so this isn't something new with the Artificer. If they want autoloading then it already has a +1 so they don't need your magic crossbow. the +2's aren't a problem because by the magic items scaling listed in the DMG. They shouldn't really be getting +2's until Tier 3 and many of their infusions auto-advance into being +2's at level 10. Meaning they already have that when it's time for the party to be getting them. And if your putting other effects on your magic Crossbows then they have to choose between the infusion and the magic crossbow just like things are supposed to work and other party members have to do with magical items already. And finally. Because of the way the power curve of the game works. They don't actually need magical weapons to be able to effectively fight things Until Late into Tier 3 at the earliest and more realistically into Tier 4 where things become increasingly imbalanced anyway.
And that is all ignoring the Fact that Artificer's are not heavily stat reliant to begin with So they can pick up Feats like Crossbow Expert to basically invalidate the need for the repeating infusion anyway. As well as the fact that they can Infuse a variety of items besides Weapons and Armor and they can change which ones they know every time they level. Which incidentally is the same time you'd be picking up Crossbow Expert so you have little worry of the infusion not being useful when you get the feat. And the Feat also nets you being able to fire in melee range if you want to as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My players and I have been discussing a new Armorer Artificer rule. Here is the train of thought -
As a general rule for Artificer,
"Infusing an Item
-Whenever you finish a long rest, you can touch a nonmagical object and imbue it with one of your artificer infusions, turning it into a magic item. An infusion works on only certain kinds of objects, as specified in the infusion’s description."
But the Armorer Subclass specifies,
"Arcane Armor
3rd-level Armorer feature
Your metallurgical pursuits have led to you making armor a conduit for your magic. As an action, you can turn a suit of armor you are wearing into Arcane Armor, provided you have smith’s tools in hand."
,which would allow for Magic Armor to be used as Arcane Armor. Then at ninth level, there is Armor Mod,
"Armor Modifications
9th-level Armorer feature
You learn how to use your artificer infusions to specially modify your Arcane Armor. That armor now counts as separate items for the purposes of your Infuse Items feature: armor (the chest piece), boots, helmet, and the armor’s special weapon. Each of those items can bear one of your infusions, and the infusions transfer over if you change your armor’s model with the Armor Model feature. In addition, the maximum number of items you can infuse at once increases by 2, but those extra items must be part of your Arcane Armor."
Our understanding is that this would create a specific exemption to Infusing an item's "nonmagical" restriction so long as the infusions are part of the Arcane Armor.
Of course, I'm sure this is RAW rather than RAI, but I want to know if anyone is seeing the same thing as me or if I've missed a rule somewhere. If not I'm inclined to allow Rules as Written.
We've actually already had an entire discussion about this in the thread called and as far Armorer and Magic Armor as I can tell no one has been able to give a definite answer. A few bring up that it's specific versus general. The Armorer's ability being the specific that trumps the general rule about infusions. Others disagree that the they're all magical items already so none of them will be able to get an infusion.
My personal opinion and it maybe more of a compromise than actually following RAW, since it isn't the clearest here, is that the Armor remains magic and can't be infused while the other pieces are open to receiving infusions. So to me this means that the Chest piece (as it is the one labeled Armor) couldn't be infused as it has a magical ability and would be considered a magic item. The other pieces though are no longer considered Armor for the sake of this ability, and so while they are part of the magical armor, the Armorer's ability separates them into separate items no longer classified as armor so are not magical items and can be infused.
Until we get clarification from WotC though, this in the end would most likely just end up being the DM's choice on what he allows you to do.
The RAW is not unambiguous, which is annoying. But if the intent were that "each of those items can bear one of your infusions" override the proscription against infusing magic items, the text would actually say that. The intended function of the rule is to let you treat a single item as multiple items that you can infuse separately, nothing more.
So, can you turn magic armor into Arcane Armor and then infuse that magic armor?
RAW is an uncomfortable shrug (but on the preponderance of the evidence, no).
RAI is pretty obviously no.
The feature does not say that a suit of armor becoming Arcane Armor turns into a magical suit of armor, so it is not a magical suit of armor and can be infused. As for if you can turn magical armor into Arcane Armor and then infuse it, not RAW. The armor doesn't stop being magical if it was previously magical. The level 9 armorer feature may override this by saying "Each of those items can bear one of your infusions", but that's pretty blatant rules-lawyering, and it isn't clear which rule is specific and which is general.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
An Armorer's armor is described as having magical capabilities, and both the Thundering Fists and Perfected Armor features are described as having magical effects. Being the feature is described as magical, as per the sage advice compendium, doesn't that mean Arcane Armor is, in fact, magical regardless of whether or not the armor was magical before becoming Arcane Armor?
Shouldn't that also mean that the level nine Armor Modification feature does allow the Infusion of Arcane Armor?
I'm pretty sure it's not supposed to let you infuse Magical Armor but I'd allow it at my table because otherwise you have no 9th level feature once you find a nice suit of adamantine plate, which I think is a perfect thing for an armorer anyway.
No. The specific effects are magical; that doesn’t mean the armor is magical. The artificer can cast magic spells, but that doesn’t mean the artificer is magical. The spells don’t function within an anti-magic field, but the artificer doesn’t disappear.
That’s why I prefer to treat things like Adamantine and Mithral as nonmagic. I think they’re cooler as just special metals.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
[deleted]
This is exactly what I’m getting at. It’s definitely some ambiguous rule lawyering and it’s not clear.
I also treated Adamantine/Mythril as nonmagic and the extra abilities are just characteristic of the metals themselves.
Arcane Armor can only be infused if it is nonmagical. This is no different than an artificer being unable to apply Radiant Weapon to a Holy Avenger, or Repeating Shot to an Oathbow. Armorers who wish to make full use of their Armor Modifications class feature need to use nonmagical armor to do so. This is not "unfair", it's simply how the artificer operates. One cannot temporarily imbue magic into an item that has been permanently imbued with other magic. If an Armorer finds an excellent suit of magical armor they wish to use, they will have to forego Armor Modifications.
Please do not contact or message me.
i would add to the issue that many Magical Armors are kind of a matter of what powers you want to be using anyway. Infusions just give you more options as to what magical affects you want your armor to have and there is the ability with one infusion to get yourself a base model +2 magic armor effectively. So it's only rarer or more powerful extra affects that might actually be worth heavily looking into. Particularly effects that the artificer can't replicate in some fashion anyway. Most of the possible base increase in armor class is already covered without specifically turning magical armor into your arcane armor.
Or... Armor Modification does exactly what it says it does and is not a rules exemption to magical armor.
The "can't infuse magic items" rule is a pretty dumb design choice by WOTC, but the intent of the mechanics seems pretty clear.
I have to disagree with you on that point. Stacking an infusions on preexisting magic items would get very out of hand very quickly if it was allowed. The attunement shenanigans alone are enough of a reason to nix that idea. If it weren’t RAW, it would likely be the most common houserule in 5e.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The problem is it makes artificers scale inversely with how magical the campaign is. The more items I hand out as a GM, the less they can infuse. I can never give our artificer a magic hand crossbow because if I do she can't auto-reload it anymore. That's pretty jank.
It also creates this nonsense where before anyone gets a magic weapon, the artificer gets a +1 to certain things as one of their class features... and then when I had out magic gear that bonus effectively goes away because now it's just equivalent to what everyone else has. Then if someone gets a +2 whatever, now the artificer is actually at -1 using their own tricks. What's the balance point there?
It's a horrendous mechanic.
The point of my post was not to determine if things could/should/would get out of control. The point of the post was to bring all the evidence that I could find on it and present it. With the way it is written is that it either doesn't work at all or is borderline game breaking.
Except Neither of those are true.
It does work as written and it's not borderline game breaking. Your just taking two hyperbollic extreme's and forcing those on the situation. Taking one item and turning it into 4 Works just fine as it is written. All you have to do is think of it going from one single piece that cannot be separated into 4 individual interlocking pieces that can be seperated and thus hold 4 different infusions. This is actually far simpler than your making it out to be and it does not invalidate how things are worked or any rules and it does not turn the whole thing into some kind of game breaking mechanic. It just takes an object that cannot be suplemented by other magical items into one that can Just like others can have that's all.
They do not scale inversely. Your making two bad assumptions.
The First assumption is that the Artificer wants the particular items your handing out. Which while you may tailor items to them many stories do not. So the Artificer now has the option to ignore many of the offered items and pick the exact ones they want which is actually an enhancement in benefit.
The Second Bad Assumption is that the Artificer Can only, and should only, use their Infusions for themselves and they are only part of their own power curve which is actually not true. If the Artificer does accept Magical Items gathered through the course of adventure. This free's up infusions that they can share with Party members. Helping them to Tailor things they use a bit more to what they are after rather than relying on the random drops as well. Because the Artificer is a support class and infusions are designed to be used to benefit more than just themselves but potentially other party members as well.
And your Complaints about +1's are kind of hollow. There are other things that give the equivalent of +1's so this isn't something new with the Artificer. If they want autoloading then it already has a +1 so they don't need your magic crossbow. the +2's aren't a problem because by the magic items scaling listed in the DMG. They shouldn't really be getting +2's until Tier 3 and many of their infusions auto-advance into being +2's at level 10. Meaning they already have that when it's time for the party to be getting them. And if your putting other effects on your magic Crossbows then they have to choose between the infusion and the magic crossbow just like things are supposed to work and other party members have to do with magical items already. And finally. Because of the way the power curve of the game works. They don't actually need magical weapons to be able to effectively fight things Until Late into Tier 3 at the earliest and more realistically into Tier 4 where things become increasingly imbalanced anyway.
And that is all ignoring the Fact that Artificer's are not heavily stat reliant to begin with So they can pick up Feats like Crossbow Expert to basically invalidate the need for the repeating infusion anyway. As well as the fact that they can Infuse a variety of items besides Weapons and Armor and they can change which ones they know every time they level. Which incidentally is the same time you'd be picking up Crossbow Expert so you have little worry of the infusion not being useful when you get the feat. And the Feat also nets you being able to fire in melee range if you want to as well.