Perhaps an artificer (alchemist) with painter's supplies. Someone mentioned that idea on an artificer discussion thread.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Devious serpent folk devoid of compassion, yuan-ti manipulate other creatures by arousing their doubts, evoking their fears, and elevating and crushing their hopes. From remote temples in jungles, swamps, and deserts, the yuan-ti plot to supplant and dominate all other races and to make themselves gods.
I would say probably artificer or bard. Artificers do magic through their tools, and bards to magic through their performance (usually music, but it doesn't have to be).
Bard sounds plausible. EDIT: No, wizard, if you go with what I'm saying below.
One thing to consider, though, is how this would work in action. For example, are you thinking that every magical effect you want to create would come from making a brand new painting? It would be hard to justify creating a new painting in 6 seconds, right? Whereas a typical spell can be cast with 1 action, or approx 6 seconds.
So do you really want all of your magical ability to come from the act of painting, in that moment? Here are some things to think about, because the idea itself is pretty cool:
A character who replaced all V, S, and M spell components with the act of painting specifically for ritual spells. The typical wizard casts Find Familiar by chanting, lighting candles, etc etc. You cast the same spell in the same time by painting the familiar. But that's for rituals specifically.
For other spells, maybe what you're doing is preparing magically charged paintings in advance. Picture a wizard (they prep spells, unlike other spell casters) who walks around with a small stack of 3x5 inch painted cards. One has a painting of an exploding fireball--on his action, he draws that from the deck and flings it into the air! Boom, fireball. Your spell preparation on a Long Rest would then be creating these small paintings to be used later.
If I were the DM I'd allow both of those. Both require changes to spell components, but neither seems really problematic. You could still require a Verbal component to the card-casting (not just anyone can use them), still have to have a hand free to cast, etc. That part is more just flavor than anything.
What the DM would have to decide, though, is whether you could paint your fireball painting on the side of a building, and set it off from a distance :) Easy solution is that no, you can only paint spell paintings on those little cards, made from special material. But it might be fun and balance-able to allow you to paint your spells on other things as well.
So just some things to think about. I like the idea quite a bit, haven't heard this one before. (Although I did think of the Amber novels and the Trumps they use, in terms of the intersection of art and magic.)
It doesn't have to be a complete painting. A single yellow zig-zag = lightning bolt. A red-orange circle = fireball.
Ever watch Naruto/boruto? Ninja art: super beast scroll. (Wow that felt dorky to type.)
Have not watched that, no. You could go that route. Thematically, that's not what comes to mind for me if someone says they get their magic from 'painting'. I spend a lot of my life drawing stick figures on chalkboards, but I only use the word 'drawing' very loosely :D
Chinese calligraphy is often referred to as 'drawing' the characters, and they are not so much more complex than a zig zag sometimes. But I'd also say that calligraphy done right takes more care than you could do in combat.
Anyway, yeah, that could be a good way to go. I just personally have that in an entirely different category from what I was thinking of when I read the OP.
If you didnt want go with a spell caster, I could see barbarian being viable, painting abstract murals with the blood of their enemies. Or ranger who excels at tracking beasts and monsters, but not to kill them, but to paint them in their surroundings
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If I wanted to play a character who was a painter and derived their powers from that, what class should I play as?
i like linguistics and, well, d&d, obviously. this bio hadn't been updated for 3 years so i figured i'd do that.
I'd say it depends:
Are they creating magical effects through their paintings with precise compositions? Wizard
Is their style more chaotic and spur of the moment? Chaos Magic Sorcerer
Did they struck a deal with another entity to infuse their paintings with power? Warlock
Bard as well could be an option to consider for the spur of the moment one, but probably more difficult to make work
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
Perhaps an artificer (alchemist) with painter's supplies. Someone mentioned that idea on an artificer discussion thread.
Devious serpent folk devoid of compassion, yuan-ti manipulate other creatures by arousing their doubts, evoking their fears, and elevating and crushing their hopes. From remote temples in jungles, swamps, and deserts, the yuan-ti plot to supplant and dominate all other races and to make themselves gods.
I would say probably artificer or bard. Artificers do magic through their tools, and bards to magic through their performance (usually music, but it doesn't have to be).
Bard sounds plausible. EDIT: No, wizard, if you go with what I'm saying below.
One thing to consider, though, is how this would work in action. For example, are you thinking that every magical effect you want to create would come from making a brand new painting? It would be hard to justify creating a new painting in 6 seconds, right? Whereas a typical spell can be cast with 1 action, or approx 6 seconds.
So do you really want all of your magical ability to come from the act of painting, in that moment? Here are some things to think about, because the idea itself is pretty cool:
If I were the DM I'd allow both of those. Both require changes to spell components, but neither seems really problematic. You could still require a Verbal component to the card-casting (not just anyone can use them), still have to have a hand free to cast, etc. That part is more just flavor than anything.
What the DM would have to decide, though, is whether you could paint your fireball painting on the side of a building, and set it off from a distance :) Easy solution is that no, you can only paint spell paintings on those little cards, made from special material. But it might be fun and balance-able to allow you to paint your spells on other things as well.
So just some things to think about. I like the idea quite a bit, haven't heard this one before. (Although I did think of the Amber novels and the Trumps they use, in terms of the intersection of art and magic.)
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
It doesn't have to be a complete painting. A single yellow zig-zag = lightning bolt. A red-orange circle = fireball.
Ever watch Naruto/boruto? Ninja art: super beast scroll. (Wow that felt dorky to type.)
Have not watched that, no. You could go that route. Thematically, that's not what comes to mind for me if someone says they get their magic from 'painting'. I spend a lot of my life drawing stick figures on chalkboards, but I only use the word 'drawing' very loosely :D
Chinese calligraphy is often referred to as 'drawing' the characters, and they are not so much more complex than a zig zag sometimes. But I'd also say that calligraphy done right takes more care than you could do in combat.
Anyway, yeah, that could be a good way to go. I just personally have that in an entirely different category from what I was thinking of when I read the OP.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
Yes, I agree with that. That was my initial idea, but I wanted to see others' opinions. However, this seems to still be the best idea.
i like linguistics and, well, d&d, obviously. this bio hadn't been updated for 3 years so i figured i'd do that.
If you didnt want go with a spell caster, I could see barbarian being viable, painting abstract murals with the blood of their enemies. Or ranger who excels at tracking beasts and monsters, but not to kill them, but to paint them in their surroundings