So ... I was looking through the archives of forum posts throughout the web to see what, if anything, could be done to further improve the Steel Defender. What I have learned is:
Steel Defenders are Constructs, and therefore can Attune up to 3 items. Cool
Steel Defenders can wear Armor and wield Shields, but suffer from not being proficient. Good to know.
However, I occasionally saw some folks say they gave their Steel Defender things like Gauntlets of Ogre Power for +4 damage, which made me confused. The Force-Empowered Rend says it uses your spell attack modifier for the Melee Weapon Attack, and the damage is strictly 1d8+PB. Why would adding any Ability-enhancing magic items affect the Steel Defender damage?
While I am at it, let me bring this up: since not being proficient with armor/shield causes Disadvantage with attack rolls that involve Strength or Dexterity, and the Steel Defender technically uses Intelligence for the attack roll (your spell attack modifier), would it stand to reason the Steel Defender does not actually suffer Disadvantage to attack when wearing Armor or holding a Shield?
People used to give it Gauntlets of Ogre Power because the Steel Defender's rules used to be different. It used to use its own Strength score for its attack and damage formulas, but the way Wizards chose to do so was obtuse and stupid. Later on, to make the Defender (and the Homunculus Servant) easier to work with, the formulas were changed to key off of the player's stats instead. Also, Wizards actually told us the damned math instead of giving us a half-complete formula and expecting people to infer the rest.
By strictly technical RAW, your second point is correct, but it's against the spirit of the rules and I can't imagine many DMs would let it slide. By the same token, no beast is proficient in the use of armor, but barding can be made specifically for them at three times an armor set's normal cost. It's inferred by the rules that this barding does not impede the creature, since it's made specifically to fit, so an armored warhorse wearing appropriate barding doesn't suddenly have disadvantage on its attacks. The same could be said of a Steel Defender - armor needs to be made specifically to fit it at increased expense if it wishes to retain its normal function while using worn armor.
There's actually no explicit rule that says constructs need armor/shield proficiency. The rules about armor/shield proficiency penalties in the PHB are written in the context of player characters and NPCs who would normally have proficiencies.
Another question is how to attune if using digital format instead of paper. I do not see attunement slots on the steel defender's section for my artificer character's actions or features & traits sheet on DnDBeyond.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So ... I was looking through the archives of forum posts throughout the web to see what, if anything, could be done to further improve the Steel Defender. What I have learned is:
However, I occasionally saw some folks say they gave their Steel Defender things like Gauntlets of Ogre Power for +4 damage, which made me confused. The Force-Empowered Rend says it uses your spell attack modifier for the Melee Weapon Attack, and the damage is strictly 1d8+PB. Why would adding any Ability-enhancing magic items affect the Steel Defender damage?
While I am at it, let me bring this up: since not being proficient with armor/shield causes Disadvantage with attack rolls that involve Strength or Dexterity, and the Steel Defender technically uses Intelligence for the attack roll (your spell attack modifier), would it stand to reason the Steel Defender does not actually suffer Disadvantage to attack when wearing Armor or holding a Shield?
People used to give it Gauntlets of Ogre Power because the Steel Defender's rules used to be different. It used to use its own Strength score for its attack and damage formulas, but the way Wizards chose to do so was obtuse and stupid. Later on, to make the Defender (and the Homunculus Servant) easier to work with, the formulas were changed to key off of the player's stats instead. Also, Wizards actually told us the damned math instead of giving us a half-complete formula and expecting people to infer the rest.
By strictly technical RAW, your second point is correct, but it's against the spirit of the rules and I can't imagine many DMs would let it slide. By the same token, no beast is proficient in the use of armor, but barding can be made specifically for them at three times an armor set's normal cost. It's inferred by the rules that this barding does not impede the creature, since it's made specifically to fit, so an armored warhorse wearing appropriate barding doesn't suddenly have disadvantage on its attacks. The same could be said of a Steel Defender - armor needs to be made specifically to fit it at increased expense if it wishes to retain its normal function while using worn armor.
Please do not contact or message me.
There's actually no explicit rule that says constructs need armor/shield proficiency. The rules about armor/shield proficiency penalties in the PHB are written in the context of player characters and NPCs who would normally have proficiencies.
Huh. That is a really interesting point. Further validated through the MM Appendix B elaboration on customizing NPCs.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Another question is how to attune if using digital format instead of paper. I do not see attunement slots on the steel defender's section for my artificer character's actions or features & traits sheet on DnDBeyond.