It hasn't stopped being up to the DM to decide what ability mod you can use for a given roll, they just gave suggested abilities for each tool- in the case of the smith's ones, I expect most DMs were already calling for STR checks if you're using them to shape metal or- per the use outlined in the new PHB- pry open a doorway or container.
Besides, Artificers are fairly SAD, so it's not like you can't spare some points for STR.
Any idea how they plan on fixing the tools problem with Artificer? It used to be up to the DM to decide what stat you used with your tools. Now that Smith Tools is Strength based, that doesn't work so well for the Artificer/Armorer since Strength is a dump stat. Maybe they have a special way for the Armorer to use his Int stat for Smith Tools?
If you want your Artificer to be better at Smithing, don't make STR your dump stat. "Problem" solved
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Any idea how they plan on fixing the tools problem with Artificer? It used to be up to the DM to decide what stat you used with your tools. Now that Smith Tools is Strength based, that doesn't work so well for the Artificer/Armorer since Strength is a dump stat. Maybe they have a special way for the Armorer to use his Int stat for Smith Tools?
If you want your Artificer to be better at Smithing, don't make STR your dump stat. "Problem" solved
Given how the ones I've met play, I assumed that Wisdom was always their dump stat :-p
I think they're asking for a RAW fix, not a DM one.
Because in RAW 2024, Smith's Tools use Strength, & nothing else is allowed if you play RAW.
Unfortunately, I don't think an early discussion thread is going to get that demand for a RAW fix to official sources.
& the woulda coulda shouldas begin the second a thing is implemented, even as free errata.
The way the DMG outlines running ability checks is to first determine what ability is appropriate to the task and then determine if any proficiencies should be applied. Ergo, it is not in fact RAW that STR must be used in conjunction with Smith’s Tools. It is likely to be the most common, as I previously noted, but the system does not explicitly lock it in.
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Sorry. I guess I need to clarify a bit. I am a bit new to D&D 5E and completely new to the Artificer. I have been getting advice from a couple of people who play D&D a lot and I have read much about it on the internet. Pretty much all I have been getting in the way of advice has been a bit confusing and maybe even deceptive. Much of The Artificer (I have been told) is a sort of Jack of All Trades build. Don't put any points in Strength. INT is your primary stat. INT is supposed to do everything for you. I guess it does if you follow the main guidelines. IDK. My main confusion was how the tools work. 2014 rules aren't very specific about what stat to use with what tools. Much is left up to the DM, which is fine. 2024 rules are much more specific. Each set of tools has a specific stat now. (Jewelers Tools INT, Smith Tools STR, etc. although the DM can still be flexible with this I imagine. Maybe the DM allowed INT with Smith Tools because of the class design in 2014 rules. IDK).
My biggest confusion is the path of the Armorer. If INT is supposed to be your main stat and it is supposed to do everything for you, how does it work with Smithing ... especially with the 2024 rule changes. Other Artificer builds may use Thieves or Jewelers tools more, so perhaps it isn't an issue. However, I don't think an Armorer is much of an Armorer without Smith Tools. Here is where the builds and advice seem to break down. Thus my question. I was just wondering if the new changes will address any of these issues.
I guess I am just not seeing much advice on the Armorer build and it looks like it doesn't fit the "INT does everything" mold the way that other artificer builds do.
(Also, yes I joined back in 2019 with some friends. We tried D&D a little but have mostly been playing other games. Only recently have we been playing more D&D).
I mean, keep in mind you don't actually use your ability scores for actual crafting, that whole system runs independently. The ability scores associated with the tools are based on how you might typically use the tools to accomplish tasks in the moment- the Jeweler's Tools example is discerning value with gems, which naturally requires knowledge rather than physical capabilities. Thus the Smith's Tools example of using them to force something open gives STR as the stat.
Sorry. I guess I need to clarify a bit. I am a bit new to D&D 5E and completely new to the Artificer. I have been getting advice from a couple of people who play D&D a lot and I have read much about it on the internet. Pretty much all I have been getting in the way of advice has been a bit confusing and maybe even deceptive. Much of The Artificer (I have been told) is a sort of Jack of All Trades build. Don't put any points in Strength. INT is your primary stat. INT is supposed to do everything for you. I guess it does if you follow the main guidelines. IDK. My main confusion was how the tools work. 2014 rules aren't very specific about what stat to use with what tools. Much is left up to the DM, which is fine. 2024 rules are much more specific. Each set of tools has a specific stat now. (Jewelers Tools INT, Smith Tools STR, etc. although the DM can still be flexible with this I imagine. Maybe the DM allowed INT with Smith Tools because of the class design in 2014 rules. IDK).
My biggest confusion is the path of the Armorer. If INT is supposed to be your main stat and it is supposed to do everything for you, how does it work with Smithing ... especially with the 2024 rule changes. Other Artificer builds may use Thieves or Jewelers tools more, so perhaps it isn't an issue. However, I don't think an Armorer is much of an Armorer without Smith Tools. Here is where the builds and advice seem to break down. Thus my question. I was just wondering if the new changes will address any of these issues.
I guess I am just not seeing much advice on the Armorer build and it looks like it doesn't fit the "INT does everything" mold the way that other artificer builds do.
(Also, yes I joined back in 2019 with some friends. We tried D&D a little but have mostly been playing other games. Only recently have we been playing more D&D).
Ah, understood. Sorry if I came off as a jerk in my prior responses
As you seem to be figuring out, advice on how to make a character is basically never one size fits all. "Use STR as a dump stat" is fine for some Artificer builds, but you don't have to do it with every one. If you have an Artificer with Smith's tools, it's perfectly reasonable to give them a good STR score, and use something else as your dump stat instead
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Your advice is helpful. Part of my problem is trying to determine one of three things I guess. 1) Am I correct in my observations and I need to work out Armorer differently. 2) Am I missing something that corrects the issues that I am observing or 3) Does D&D also see the problem and make corrections in this newest version that makes the Artificer/Armorer work better within the 2024 rule changes as they intended.
Lol. In the past I have often spun my wheels in one direction when the correct answer was one of the other two.
Nothing in the Armorers features require the use of Strength with Smithing Tools. As a matter of fact nothing in the Subclass requires you to roll to use them at all. You just have them in hand. Int is the Primary Stat, but if you want to be good at using Smithing Tools beyond them existing as a Spell Focus, you also have to invest in Strength. Just like any other character that wants to be good at something outside their core features you have to build accordingly.
You can certainly play an Armorer with low strength if you wish to - even though it might feel odd to have smith's tools with a STR of 8, your class features don't use that stat and your Armorer can do all the things they need to with their puny strength. They even have the power to ignore strength around wearing heavy armor.
If you need to justify it, accuracy in hammering is a big part of success, and your Artificer can also build tooling that helps with tasks. A lever is a girl's best friend, I like to say. Modern smithing shows you a lot of ways to get things done.
Where it does become a difficulty is if your campaign uses variant encumbrance. Then, the inability to carry things is an issue, with all the tools you want not to mention any gadgets you're carrying. There are solutions including a bag of holding, but boots of striding and springing or a ring of strength are options also. (The strength item you can make as an infusion is only useful for grappling etc, because it has charges.)
So mechanically, you don't need it. But if your artificer is thematically swinging a hammer all day, I agree that dumping STR seems maybe wrong for that character. It's whatever works for you; there are many ways to a great Artificer.
Your advice is helpful. Part of my problem is trying to determine one of three things I guess. 1) Am I correct in my observations and I need to work out Armorer differently. 2) Am I missing something that corrects the issues that I am observing or 3) Does D&D also see the problem and make corrections in this newest version that makes the Artificer/Armorer work better within the 2024 rule changes as they intended.
Lol. In the past I have often spun my wheels in one direction when the correct answer was one of the other two.
I think you're overestimating the importance of using smith tools. You don't have to roll skill checks to make your Armorer's armor, or to use infusions. If you want to craft things in your downtime, you'd use it, but that doesn't come up all that often in my experience.
I do see your point. With my luck (or lack thereof I should say) and experience, something like this is GOING to happen. (Not talking D&D only but pretty much all games I have played):
"Oh, you're the Armorer. Correct? I am going to need you to do THIS. Go ahead and make your Armorer/Smithing roll". (At only +1 I fail utterly).
Yeah, I'm going to want to improve that Smithing roll. :)
I mean, low rolls happen in D&D and until you get into higher levels even having high stats and prof still leaves a notable failure range- for a DC 15 check, having a +8 score still leaves you with a 30% chance of failure. But I think you might be overestimating how likely it is something really crucial is going to hinge on a roll you use your tool prof for.
I do see your point. With my luck (or lack thereof I should say) and experience, something like this is GOING to happen. (Not talking D&D only but pretty much all games I have played):
"Oh, you're the Armorer. Correct? I am going to need you to do THIS. Go ahead and make your Armorer/Smithing roll". (At only +1 I fail utterly).
Yeah, I'm going to want to improve that Smithing roll. :)
I mean, it's really not a thing that's going to happen, and you can still roll well. At most it's going to be while crafting and the more likely scenario is that you need a forge and don't have access to one.
My artificer has done fine with a -1 to STR. Just has to have a bag of holding because all those tools weigh rather a lot!
By comparison, having a +4 INT has gotten the artificer and their party out of a lot of tough scrapes.
I do see your point. With my luck (or lack thereof I should say) and experience, something like this is GOING to happen. (Not talking D&D only but pretty much all games I have played):
"Oh, you're the Armorer. Correct? I am going to need you to do THIS. Go ahead and make your Armorer/Smithing roll". (At only +1 I fail utterly).
Yeah, I'm going to want to improve that Smithing roll. :)
At level 6 you get Tool Expertise, and at level 7 you get Flash of Genius to save the day.
Flash of Genius
Starting at 7th level, you gain the ability to come up with solutions under pressure. When you or another creature you can see within 30 feet of you makes an ability check or a saving throw, you can use your reaction to add your Intelligence modifier to the roll.
You can use this feature a number of times equal to your Intelligence modifier (minimum of once). You regain all expended uses when you finish a long rest.
Sorry. I guess I need to clarify a bit. I am a bit new to D&D 5E and completely new to the Artificer. I have been getting advice from a couple of people who play D&D a lot and I have read much about it on the internet. Pretty much all I have been getting in the way of advice has been a bit confusing and maybe even deceptive. Much of The Artificer (I have been told) is a sort of Jack of All Trades build. Don't put any points in Strength. INT is your primary stat. INT is supposed to do everything for you. I guess it does if you follow the main guidelines. IDK. My main confusion was how the tools work. 2014 rules aren't very specific about what stat to use with what tools. Much is left up to the DM, which is fine. 2024 rules are much more specific. Each set of tools has a specific stat now. (Jewelers Tools INT, Smith Tools STR, etc. although the DM can still be flexible with this I imagine. Maybe the DM allowed INT with Smith Tools because of the class design in 2014 rules. IDK).
My biggest confusion is the path of the Armorer. If INT is supposed to be your main stat and it is supposed to do everything for you, how does it work with Smithing ... especially with the 2024 rule changes. Other Artificer builds may use Thieves or Jewelers tools more, so perhaps it isn't an issue. However, I don't think an Armorer is much of an Armorer without Smith Tools. Here is where the builds and advice seem to break down. Thus my question. I was just wondering if the new changes will address any of these issues.
I guess I am just not seeing much advice on the Armorer build and it looks like it doesn't fit the "INT does everything" mold the way that other artificer builds do.
(Also, yes I joined back in 2019 with some friends. We tried D&D a little but have mostly been playing other games. Only recently have we been playing more D&D).
It's worth pointing out that the Archetype that the Armourer is going for is the Tony Stark/Iron Man thing. This makes the subclass quite different than the others, and yes, it means Str becomes part of their "I need to be at least semi-good at this to work well" repertoire. On the other hand, you now have a half caster that can outfit the party with gadgets, hold up reasonably well as both a frontline fighter and as a Sneak and also be a skill monkey. You're going to have to be at least a bit MAD (Multiple Ability-score Dependent) to pull that off.
Remember that subclasses exist for that precise reason. The class provides an archetype, but the subclass provides a bent to it that makes it very different. The Armourer is kind of the Artificer's equivalent of the Rogue's Arcane Trickster, the Wizard's Bladesinger or the Fighter's Eldritch Knight - it provides much more diversity in ability at the sacrifice of becoming more MAD. The other Artificers seem to be more focused in terms of ability score dependency and in their abilities.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It hasn't stopped being up to the DM to decide what ability mod you can use for a given roll, they just gave suggested abilities for each tool- in the case of the smith's ones, I expect most DMs were already calling for STR checks if you're using them to shape metal or- per the use outlined in the new PHB- pry open a doorway or container.
Besides, Artificers are fairly SAD, so it's not like you can't spare some points for STR.
I think they're asking for a RAW fix, not a DM one.
Because in RAW 2024, Smith's Tools use Strength, & nothing else is allowed if you play RAW.
Unfortunately, I don't think an early discussion thread is going to get that demand for a RAW fix to official sources.
& the woulda coulda shouldas begin the second a thing is implemented, even as free errata.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
If you want your Artificer to be better at Smithing, don't make STR your dump stat. "Problem" solved
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Given how the ones I've met play, I assumed that Wisdom was always their dump stat :-p
The way the DMG outlines running ability checks is to first determine what ability is appropriate to the task and then determine if any proficiencies should be applied. Ergo, it is not in fact RAW that STR must be used in conjunction with Smith’s Tools. It is likely to be the most common, as I previously noted, but the system does not explicitly lock it in.
There is no "RAW fix" for the repercussions of a decision you make during character creation
If you make STR a dump stat, then deal with it. Don't
whine toask WotC to change the rules so your dump stat doesn't have a negative impactActive characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Sorry. I guess I need to clarify a bit. I am a bit new to D&D 5E and completely new to the Artificer. I have been getting advice from a couple of people who play D&D a lot and I have read much about it on the internet. Pretty much all I have been getting in the way of advice has been a bit confusing and maybe even deceptive. Much of The Artificer (I have been told) is a sort of Jack of All Trades build. Don't put any points in Strength. INT is your primary stat. INT is supposed to do everything for you. I guess it does if you follow the main guidelines. IDK. My main confusion was how the tools work. 2014 rules aren't very specific about what stat to use with what tools. Much is left up to the DM, which is fine. 2024 rules are much more specific. Each set of tools has a specific stat now. (Jewelers Tools INT, Smith Tools STR, etc. although the DM can still be flexible with this I imagine. Maybe the DM allowed INT with Smith Tools because of the class design in 2014 rules. IDK).
My biggest confusion is the path of the Armorer. If INT is supposed to be your main stat and it is supposed to do everything for you, how does it work with Smithing ... especially with the 2024 rule changes. Other Artificer builds may use Thieves or Jewelers tools more, so perhaps it isn't an issue. However, I don't think an Armorer is much of an Armorer without Smith Tools. Here is where the builds and advice seem to break down. Thus my question. I was just wondering if the new changes will address any of these issues.
I guess I am just not seeing much advice on the Armorer build and it looks like it doesn't fit the "INT does everything" mold the way that other artificer builds do.
(Also, yes I joined back in 2019 with some friends. We tried D&D a little but have mostly been playing other games. Only recently have we been playing more D&D).
I mean, keep in mind you don't actually use your ability scores for actual crafting, that whole system runs independently. The ability scores associated with the tools are based on how you might typically use the tools to accomplish tasks in the moment- the Jeweler's Tools example is discerning value with gems, which naturally requires knowledge rather than physical capabilities. Thus the Smith's Tools example of using them to force something open gives STR as the stat.
Ah, understood. Sorry if I came off as a jerk in my prior responses
As you seem to be figuring out, advice on how to make a character is basically never one size fits all. "Use STR as a dump stat" is fine for some Artificer builds, but you don't have to do it with every one. If you have an Artificer with Smith's tools, it's perfectly reasonable to give them a good STR score, and use something else as your dump stat instead
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Thank you AntonSirius.
Your advice is helpful. Part of my problem is trying to determine one of three things I guess. 1) Am I correct in my observations and I need to work out Armorer differently. 2) Am I missing something that corrects the issues that I am observing or 3) Does D&D also see the problem and make corrections in this newest version that makes the Artificer/Armorer work better within the 2024 rule changes as they intended.
Lol. In the past I have often spun my wheels in one direction when the correct answer was one of the other two.
Nothing in the Armorers features require the use of Strength with Smithing Tools. As a matter of fact nothing in the Subclass requires you to roll to use them at all. You just have them in hand. Int is the Primary Stat, but if you want to be good at using Smithing Tools beyond them existing as a Spell Focus, you also have to invest in Strength. Just like any other character that wants to be good at something outside their core features you have to build accordingly.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
You can certainly play an Armorer with low strength if you wish to - even though it might feel odd to have smith's tools with a STR of 8, your class features don't use that stat and your Armorer can do all the things they need to with their puny strength. They even have the power to ignore strength around wearing heavy armor.
If you need to justify it, accuracy in hammering is a big part of success, and your Artificer can also build tooling that helps with tasks. A lever is a girl's best friend, I like to say. Modern smithing shows you a lot of ways to get things done.
Where it does become a difficulty is if your campaign uses variant encumbrance. Then, the inability to carry things is an issue, with all the tools you want not to mention any gadgets you're carrying. There are solutions including a bag of holding, but boots of striding and springing or a ring of strength are options also. (The strength item you can make as an infusion is only useful for grappling etc, because it has charges.)
So mechanically, you don't need it. But if your artificer is thematically swinging a hammer all day, I agree that dumping STR seems maybe wrong for that character. It's whatever works for you; there are many ways to a great Artificer.
I think you're overestimating the importance of using smith tools. You don't have to roll skill checks to make your Armorer's armor, or to use infusions. If you want to craft things in your downtime, you'd use it, but that doesn't come up all that often in my experience.
I do see your point. With my luck (or lack thereof I should say) and experience, something like this is GOING to happen. (Not talking D&D only but pretty much all games I have played):
"Oh, you're the Armorer. Correct? I am going to need you to do THIS. Go ahead and make your Armorer/Smithing roll". (At only +1 I fail utterly).
Yeah, I'm going to want to improve that Smithing roll. :)
I mean, low rolls happen in D&D and until you get into higher levels even having high stats and prof still leaves a notable failure range- for a DC 15 check, having a +8 score still leaves you with a 30% chance of failure. But I think you might be overestimating how likely it is something really crucial is going to hinge on a roll you use your tool prof for.
I mean, it's really not a thing that's going to happen, and you can still roll well. At most it's going to be while crafting and the more likely scenario is that you need a forge and don't have access to one.
My artificer has done fine with a -1 to STR. Just has to have a bag of holding because all those tools weigh rather a lot!
By comparison, having a +4 INT has gotten the artificer and their party out of a lot of tough scrapes.
At level 6 you get Tool Expertise, and at level 7 you get Flash of Genius to save the day.
It's worth pointing out that the Archetype that the Armourer is going for is the Tony Stark/Iron Man thing. This makes the subclass quite different than the others, and yes, it means Str becomes part of their "I need to be at least semi-good at this to work well" repertoire. On the other hand, you now have a half caster that can outfit the party with gadgets, hold up reasonably well as both a frontline fighter and as a Sneak and also be a skill monkey. You're going to have to be at least a bit MAD (Multiple Ability-score Dependent) to pull that off.
Remember that subclasses exist for that precise reason. The class provides an archetype, but the subclass provides a bent to it that makes it very different. The Armourer is kind of the Artificer's equivalent of the Rogue's Arcane Trickster, the Wizard's Bladesinger or the Fighter's Eldritch Knight - it provides much more diversity in ability at the sacrifice of becoming more MAD. The other Artificers seem to be more focused in terms of ability score dependency and in their abilities.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Anyone else still not see their dice in the collections after pre ordering?
Probably because the dice aren't released yet.
But if they have been...
Remember to sync your entitlements on your account under "licenses"
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.