They're definitely a player that has expressed a level of discomfort in leaning too heavily into the odds of things, which personally I... strongly disagree with in a game of statistics and random chance when it comes to rolling dice...?? They're very much NOT a "high risk high reward" sort of player and have a lot of issues on things like how they spend their resources (i.e. not wanting to consume potions or spell slots often without knowing if there'll be a way to get a return on them). In retrospect, I definitely see signs of them trying to gain statistical advantages or mechanical comforts to lessen the odds of failure or probable difficulty at all, but I think it's less of "I want to powergame" and more of "I'm nervous when I don't have the answer."
Maybe this segues into a different problem altogether, but maybe this can also be a part of this conversation too; how can I use the themes of alchemy and craftsmanship to help enable this player to feel less nervous about being thrown curveballs and things they might not be so prepared for? I figured that just the premise of having crafting and projects like this available would be enough, but I'm wondering what else I can do for them to give them comfort with this type of character that things will end out alright. I don't want them entering every scenario with the assumption that, because of their measly Wizard HP, they'll drop dead unless they have the perfect solution at hand, y'know?
So I combed through the equipment list for items I thought could be manufactures using an alchemist's kit and I came up with this: Acid (vial), Alchemist's Fire (flask), Blasting Powder, Oil (flask), Soap. Between all those I feel there is a solution for a lot of different problems. Especially backed up with Wizard spells. I have found that using Catapult in conjunction with flasks of oil can do a lot of damage when followed with fire spells. Perhaps just giving this player the management of both downtime and money to produce this stuff as well as the inventory management to allocate their use will give the player a sense of accomplishment?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
If you feel outclassed in science by your player, two options:
1. Allow them their homebrew. Players who homebrew are engaged in the game. Whatever they say about the real world science, believe it. But you control the game balance. If real world science would make an overpowered item or ability, limit access to the ingredients.
2. Say your world is a fantasy world, and real world physics don't apply. Other original physical laws may apply, which their character may learn about by investigating labs and libraries in your world.
I would disagree with #!. The homebrew the player is suggesting isn't even science at all. It screams magical potions and stuff. And the homebrew is blatantly overpowered. It's not science themed at all.
Our eager scientist used the Minor Alchemy feature to transmute a dried log into iron at sunset to collect the water from transpiration during evening cooling on its surface. It was the only kind of solution that the entire party could think of to try to help out and we ruled that it worked well enough, but I'm concerned that it might set a precedent about problem solving in the future. I'm not upset that the problem was solved, but moreso that I tried reading up on the science of it afterwards and it all has gone way over my head; I haven't been able to find any evidence of it being a legitimate thing.
I think there's an important distinction to be made here. People have been collecting dew in the desert for as long as people have lived in deserts. It doesn't require an in-depth knowledge of transpiration or water adhesion or whatever - all it requires is leaving stuff out overnight and noticing that some items were wet in the morning. This is the kind of thing I'd file under Survival, not science. And in a pre-modern desert culture it would be common knowledge. Be careful not to overthink this stuff.
As for homebrew, that's a slippery slope and you need to keep a tight reign on it. If you can't point to an existing game mechanic that gives roughly the same benefit at roughly the same level for roughly the same cost, it should not be allowed. The danger extends beyond this character - once that genie is out of the bottle, you're likely to see requests for homebrew classes in every game going forward. What you end up with is 1-2 players dominating the game while the others helplessly watch from the sidelines.
The support is appreciated all around, and for what it's worth we've discussed these sorta things at length together and tried to find compromises often. Long story short, this is a long-going campaign that we break into "seasons" with new characters each year, and we're moving into our fifth season- so the world is VERY well-established. This player only just entered the group last season, and they're definitely still adjusting to the type of campaign we play (more narrative rather than mechanical in some cases, but still tryna have an even mix). We try to hash things out and find compromises on these sort of things, but it's definitely a challenge. I.e., they came into our campaign wanting to try out Mystic and when that ended up being too broken even for us (we're pretty loose with rules so it was a bit of a shocker to have the powerhouse of Mystic shredding through everything lol) switched to Druid, but we had a lot of issues about character and character choices. It was all a lot, but I'd like to hope we're past it at least.
They're definitely a player that has expressed a level of discomfort in leaning too heavily into the odds of things, which personally I... strongly disagree with in a game of statistics and random chance when it comes to rolling dice...?? They're very much NOT a "high risk high reward" sort of player and have a lot of issues on things like how they spend their resources (i.e. not wanting to consume potions or spell slots often without knowing if there'll be a way to get a return on them). In retrospect, I definitely see signs of them trying to gain statistical advantages or mechanical comforts to lessen the odds of failure or probable difficulty at all, but I think it's less of "I want to powergame" and more of "I'm nervous when I don't have the answer."
Maybe this segues into a different problem altogether, but maybe this can also be a part of this conversation too; how can I use the themes of alchemy and craftsmanship to help enable this player to feel less nervous about being thrown curveballs and things they might not be so prepared for? I figured that just the premise of having crafting and projects like this available would be enough, but I'm wondering what else I can do for them to give them comfort with this type of character that things will end out alright. I don't want them entering every scenario with the assumption that, because of their measly Wizard HP, they'll drop dead unless they have the perfect solution at hand, y'know?
For what it's worth though, your guys' experiences are also super reassuring as well, and I think the more that we discuss it and see the problems that come with catering too much to this sort of thing that I'll have to explain it in this new light and keep things trimmed down to the basics. I'm down for bending things for the rule of cool, but I'm not really sure I feel super cool about having all of my potential puzzles and problems I want to throw at the party solved in a pinch. I do think a huge part of this is just going to have to break down to the idea of "this is fantasy and I'm not here to extrapolate extensive science in my world, I don't got the brains or the energy for it." The handwaving of magic systems only happens because of the rule of cool, but there's not exactly too much excitement happening for me doing an extensive science project and considering how the entire periodic table factors into my game...
#1. What the heck. They came in with a mystic? First session. First someone would only know about mystic likely through the internet as it was never published. And 90% of everything talking about the mystic talks about how broken it is. The guy pretty much 100% knew they would break the game with it. He's using (not even using more like exploiting)your group's trust in this person in order to try and break the game.
#2. So the guy who's not into high risk high reward makes a subclass about rolling on a RANDOM TABLE? (Edit: Not referring to alchemist artificer but the overpowered subclass that the player wanted) It seems more like an excuse on why they want to be overpowered rather than an actual reason. If they really wants to be low risk maybe he should have a different character concept. I'd say if they want to stick with wizard maybe they can go abjuration wizard for that nice defense. Also D&D isn't game where one player has all the solutions. And if one character has all the solutions it's not fun for the rest of the table as it ends up with a Mary Sue character overshadowing the rest of the players. The players work together to overcome problems. This person at least seems to me like they are trying to bring in a Mary Sue who solves every problem in their way.
#3. If the person wants to be less risky I'd advise maybe a 2 level multiclass into sorcerer or the player to just play a sorcerer. Font of magic, sorcery points, etc allows a ton of versatility with spells.
#4. I do also love the idea of very basic skill checks as suggested with alchemy supplies. Just keep a tight leash on that and if you know nothing about the crazy science, don't allow it. You shouldn't need a science degree to be a DM. And I'm a science boi myself saying this.
#2. So the guy who's not into high risk high reward makes a subclass about rolling on a RANDOM TABLE?
Actually it seemed they went with Transmutation Wizard rather than Alchemist Artificer.
The person initially suggested an overpowered wizard subclass to the OP which was in the main post. I mean transmutation wizard also sort of fits the alchemist vibe. The wizard subclass was like alchemist just overpowered.
First of all, again- thank you guys so much for being on this topic with me; it's a slippery slope trying to juggle this player's feelings and desires while also trying to keep a handle and balance on everything as a DM. Having this input and input from other close DM friends of mine is really helpful in trying to make sense of all of this. It's incredibly validating to hear all of the feedback and thoughts you've been giving to help manage these complicated ideas. <3
Our eager scientist used the Minor Alchemy feature to transmute a dried log into iron at sunset to collect the water from transpiration during evening cooling on its surface. It was the only kind of solution that the entire party could think of to try to help out and we ruled that it worked well enough, but I'm concerned that it might set a precedent about problem solving in the future. I'm not upset that the problem was solved, but moreso that I tried reading up on the science of it afterwards and it all has gone way over my head; I haven't been able to find any evidence of it being a legitimate thing.
I think there's an important distinction to be made here. People have been collecting dew in the desert for as long as people have lived in deserts. It doesn't require an in-depth knowledge of transpiration or water adhesion or whatever - all it requires is leaving stuff out overnight and noticing that some items were wet in the morning. This is the kind of thing I'd file under Survival, not science. And in a pre-modern desert culture it would be common knowledge. Be careful not to overthink this stuff.
Addressing this first, I think this is exactly the kind of thing that I'd prefer to hear and understand. I'd much rather see references to real world examples and cultures applying these sorts of things rather than having to read up on science. Not everybody at our table is necessarily a scientist, so I don't really want to be encouraging to pull people out of the immersion of the world's themes and 5E in general to discuss things like physics, chemistry, geology, meteorology, etc. Again, even an INT 18 character might not know all of these things just because a player might have this extensive knowledge, and even so I'm not sure how much people in this fantasy realm might know of real-world sciences. I don't want to discredit this statement though, so I'm in agreement about bringing in interesting things from the real world: as long as it's something I can wrap my head around, I'd like to believe that it's something that the world I've built can wrap its head around too. I'd like to think of myself as a rather intelligent person, but even still, I tried to explain that I'm reserving a lot of my knowledge for understanding how 5E and this universe we're playing in works more than the one we live in, but that I'm willing to adapt and learn things to integrate. If they want to explain things to me and suggest things for me to keep in mind that they'd like to make clever use of, I'm all for it; if they can make sense of it to me as a person, I can make sense of it in this world as a DM.
The only thing I want to avoid is granting advantages to a player because of resources they might be using that come from out of the game. We had to have a pretty hefty discussion about it the other night and there was a lot of frustration on their end that boiled down to: "why should I be penalized for being smart" and "why can I not make use of the advantages afforded to me by being both an intelligent character and an intelligent player." Lots of frustration about dumping things into INT only to feel like they're being handicapped by what I'm telling them is allowed... The explanation I tried to offer was that there needs to be a separation of what I can rule as a DM and what they can bring to the table as a player; I can rule that somebody might be fast or strong or charming based on what is written on their character sheet, and I can provide them with information about the world they might know based on their INT score, but I can't control how much knowledge a player actively has and how that knowledge is utilized, so I can't rule on it as easily.
Another part of this problem appears to be that they don't like the structure of XGE because it leaves them with more questions than answers; there's either only the vanilla stuff or the vast unknown of their imagination to guide them. We have been passing this homebrew around as well, and I'm hoping that maybe I can pull some concepts from this to spark their creativity. They seem to like it a lot because of the structure it offers and the clear ideas it sets, but also because it seems to make crafting more commonly accessible. Still, I'm trying really hard to consider what some of these things might mean for in-game economies of how much a potion costs to make vs. how much it would sell for. I tend to have a bit of frustration and problems with classes/mechanics that "generate instant and easy revenue for players" because of how it might make other players feel; I know a lot of my players have been frustrated before to see another character generate +100gp just by rolling a reliable skill check, and I wouldn't want to enable that kind of issue again.
This situation is just so difficult to manage because I want them to still feel special, thematic, and important, but I don't want to create an imbalance or complication at the table. Now, a lot of these conversations have just left sour tastes in our mouths, and more than anything I want to figure out how to collaborate with this player rather than butt heads about what should and shouldn't be allowed in my game world. I get the impression that they feel like me saying "I don't want to include these elements of knowledge in play" is being mistaken as "I don't care for your intelligence as a person," when in reality this is more about trying to manage the things we can and can't control and keep in check. I'm thinking that maybe it might help them to see what we could accomplish with examples from XGE, so I might start pursuing the creation of my own HB formulas as well for them to think of as templates like some of you have suggested. If any of you have suggestions on potions or magic items they could be inspired off of for this Orcish alchemist that aren't necessarily gamebreaking, please feel free to share!
First of all, again- thank you guys so much for being on this topic with me; it's a slippery slope trying to juggle this player's feelings and desires while also trying to keep a handle and balance on everything as a DM. Having this input and input from other close DM friends of mine is really helpful in trying to make sense of all of this. It's incredibly validating to hear all of the feedback and thoughts you've been giving to help manage these complicated ideas. <3
Our eager scientist used the Minor Alchemy feature to transmute a dried log into iron at sunset to collect the water from transpiration during evening cooling on its surface. It was the only kind of solution that the entire party could think of to try to help out and we ruled that it worked well enough, but I'm concerned that it might set a precedent about problem solving in the future. I'm not upset that the problem was solved, but moreso that I tried reading up on the science of it afterwards and it all has gone way over my head; I haven't been able to find any evidence of it being a legitimate thing.
I think there's an important distinction to be made here. People have been collecting dew in the desert for as long as people have lived in deserts. It doesn't require an in-depth knowledge of transpiration or water adhesion or whatever - all it requires is leaving stuff out overnight and noticing that some items were wet in the morning. This is the kind of thing I'd file under Survival, not science. And in a pre-modern desert culture it would be common knowledge. Be careful not to overthink this stuff.
Addressing this first, I think this is exactly the kind of thing that I'd prefer to hear and understand. I'd much rather see references to real world examples and cultures applying these sorts of things rather than having to read up on science. Not everybody at our table is necessarily a scientist, so I don't really want to be encouraging to pull people out of the immersion of the world's themes and 5E in general to discuss things like physics, chemistry, geology, meteorology, etc. Again, even an INT 18 character might not know all of these things just because a player might have this extensive knowledge, and even so I'm not sure how much people in this fantasy realm might know of real-world sciences. I don't want to discredit this statement though, so I'm in agreement about bringing in interesting things from the real world: as long as it's something I can wrap my head around, I'd like to believe that it's something that the world I've built can wrap its head around too. I'd like to think of myself as a rather intelligent person, but even still, I tried to explain that I'm reserving a lot of my knowledge for understanding how 5E and this universe we're playing in works more than the one we live in, but that I'm willing to adapt and learn things to integrate. If they want to explain things to me and suggest things for me to keep in mind that they'd like to make clever use of, I'm all for it; if they can make sense of it to me as a person, I can make sense of it in this world as a DM.
The only thing I want to avoid is granting advantages to a player because of resources they might be using that come from out of the game. We had to have a pretty hefty discussion about it the other night and there was a lot of frustration on their end that boiled down to: "why should I be penalized for being smart" and "why can I not make use of the advantages afforded to me by being both an intelligent character and an intelligent player." Lots of frustration about dumping things into INT only to feel like they're being handicapped by what I'm telling them is allowed... The explanation I tried to offer was that there needs to be a separation of what I can rule as a DM and what they can bring to the table as a player; I can rule that somebody might be fast or strong or charming based on what is written on their character sheet, and I can provide them with information about the world they might know based on their INT score, but I can't control how much knowledge a player actively has and how that knowledge is utilized, so I can't rule on it as easily.
Another part of this problem appears to be that they don't like the structure of XGE because it leaves them with more questions than answers; there's either only the vanilla stuff or the vast unknown of their imagination to guide them. We have been passing this homebrew around as well, and I'm hoping that maybe I can pull some concepts from this to spark their creativity. They seem to like it a lot because of the structure it offers and the clear ideas it sets, but also because it seems to make crafting more commonly accessible. Still, I'm trying really hard to consider what some of these things might mean for in-game economies of how much a potion costs to make vs. how much it would sell for. I tend to have a bit of frustration and problems with classes/mechanics that "generate instant and easy revenue for players" because of how it might make other players feel; I know a lot of my players have been frustrated before to see another character generate +100gp just by rolling a reliable skill check, and I wouldn't want to enable that kind of issue again.
This situation is just so difficult to manage because I want them to still feel special, thematic, and important, but I don't want to create an imbalance or complication at the table. Now, a lot of these conversations have just left sour tastes in our mouths, and more than anything I want to figure out how to collaborate with this player rather than butt heads about what should and shouldn't be allowed in my game world. I get the impression that they feel like me saying "I don't want to include these elements of knowledge in play" is being mistaken as "I don't care for your intelligence as a person," when in reality this is more about trying to manage the things we can and can't control and keep in check. I'm thinking that maybe it might help them to see what we could accomplish with examples from XGE, so I might start pursuing the creation of my own HB formulas as well for them to think of as templates like some of you have suggested. If any of you have suggestions on potions or magic items they could be inspired off of for this Orcish alchemist that aren't necessarily gamebreaking, please feel free to share!
Use spells for the potion effects. It's easier than homebrewing 1000000 potions every time someone wants to make a potion. I'd recommend using spell scroll costs for potion ingredient costs.
It seems a little like this player is trying to bully you. Like they realize that you are trying to be accommodating, and so they are trying to push for every inch you'll give and then some. The more you talk about it, the more it seems like you've really tried to work with them, but they aren't willing to accept any limits. If it were me, I'd be really close to just shutting them down. Say you're done with these negotiations, and they can do exactly what's written in the books, and no more. I guess you're nicer than me.
Another part of this problem appears to be that they don't like the structure of XGE because it leaves them with more questions than answers; there's either only the vanilla stuff or the vast unknown of their imagination to guide them. We have been passing this homebrew around as well, and I'm hoping that maybe I can pull some concepts from this to spark their creativity. They seem to like it a lot because of the structure it offers and the clear ideas it sets, but also because it seems to make crafting more commonly accessible. Still, I'm trying really hard to consider what some of these things might mean for in-game economies of how much a potion costs to make vs. how much it would sell for. I tend to have a bit of frustration and problems with classes/mechanics that "generate instant and easy revenue for players" because of how it might make other players feel; I know a lot of my players have been frustrated before to see another character generate +100gp just by rolling a reliable skill check, and I wouldn't want to enable that kind of issue again.
Hmm ... that homebrew looks cool, but it also looks like an entire subsystem all on its own. It's almost like giving an entirely new class feature, like spellcasting, in depth and complexity. I feel like it's a lot of work and goes against my Lazy DM principles. Also it does seem like a lot of attention and toys being given to this character. I would be cautious.
If any of you have suggestions on potions or magic items they could be inspired off of for this Orcish alchemist that aren't necessarily gamebreaking, please feel free to share!
As a Lazy DM I would be more inclined to come up with an easy catch-all. How about "Bottled Help Action?" Let him come up with formulas for different potions, each of them can grant Advantage on a single roll, but each formula is specific to the roll is can boost. Takes an Action to drink and lasts for 1 minute or until used. I would adjust the DC to make the potion based on the roll it affects. Regular Skill: DC 10-15, Skill Checks that can be applied in combat or other tense situations (Grappling, Intimidating, Balancing): DC 13-17, Physical Attack Rolls (differentiate between melee and ranged): DC 15-20, Spell Attack Rolls: DC 20+
Have him experiment with different ingredients and make some of them imbibed, some of them applied like an ointment or paste, and have him record the results so he has his own little roster of potions.
Edit: Failures make poisons, but they are indistinguishable from the potion. Also, for goodness sake, don't call them all "Bottled Help Action" or they will not seem special. Each of the formulas is different and unique!
It seems a little like this player is trying to bully you. Like they realize that you are trying to be accommodating, and so they are trying to push for every inch you'll give and then some. The more you talk about it, the more it seems like you've really tried to work with them, but they aren't willing to accept any limits. If it were me, I'd be really close to just shutting them down. Say you're done with these negotiations, and they can do exactly what's written in the books, and no more. I guess you're nicer than me.
Yeah honestly I'm starting to consider this player as possibly worthy to be kicked out of the games to avoid future "not good stuff" happening. I was pissed off by him suggesting "realism" for broken homebrew, but once I heard "Mystic" and his consistent lack of respect for the OP even after multiple talks I'm starting to think he should be possibly even removed from the group, or at least restricted to no homebrew and unearthed arcana.
I'm also definitely in the boat of the Lazy DM mentality, considering the millions of other things I'm planning on juggling for this campaign. Looking through it, there are definitely some great ideas in it that I'd at least like to try to compromise on to help them feel a better sense of structure and understanding to the ideas behind XGE crafting. I also feel like maybe we might be able to use some of the concepts in this to achieve an idea similar to "medicines and toxins" like had been mentioned previously as opposed to the big banger "magical potions" and whatnot. I think a huuuuge distinction to be made in a lot of this is that so much more can be achieved in this world thanks to magic and fantasy than with science and real world application; if they want to lean on science and realism, maybe it just isn't as magically impressive or effective. I'm down for the idea of "old family remedies" and whatnot based on real-world herbalism that leans into the concepts in this HB, but I don't think it necessarily equates to the level of magic alchemy that XGE crafting lends to.
I also really love the idea of them experimenting and basically having research notes that they can expand upon in order to create more ideas from. I think a big thing as well is that I don't exactly want them thinking that they can make a be-all-end-all potion that just combines every amazing effect ever together into one; I'd like to believe that alchemy strikes a critical balance and that it's not necessarily possible to just cram some ingredients together and then get lucky if they somehow manage to work together. If there's to be a science behind these, I'd really like for it to be rooted in the ingredients and where they come from (i.e. maybe a Troll's regenerative properties lend to a powerful regenerative healing elixir made from its blood).
Update: just found out that alchemist's supplies have mechanics to create a series of basic items like acid, alchemist's fire, oil, soap, perfume, antitoxin, etc! I really like the idea of experimenting as well with how to administer alchemical creations as well, be it from a distance or from direct administration/inhalation/ingestion/application/etc. At the end of the day, I think the direction to go in involves giving them tools that they know they can use and future elements to discover and experiment with in the future. I don't think they should have everything all at once to start, but I want to encourage them to have things to find over the campaign so that they feel like they're finding their character's path rather than feeling like it's predetermined for them.
Update: just found out that alchemist's supplies have mechanics to create a series of basic items like acid, alchemist's fire, oil, soap, perfume, antitoxin, etc! I really like the idea of experimenting as well with how to administer alchemical creations as well, be it from a distance or from direct administration/inhalation/ingestion/application/etc. At the end of the day, I think the direction to go in involves giving them tools that they know they can use and future elements to discover and experiment with in the future. I don't think they should have everything all at once to start, but I want to encourage them to have things to find over the campaign so that they feel like they're finding their character's path rather than feeling like it's predetermined for them.
I think this is the best way to go for this specific player. The DM gives them stuff to experiment with. But yeah I'd say you shouldn't allow the player who you've been talking about to use homebrew or unearthed arcana due to very likely exploitation of it for at least this campaign.
Update: just found out that alchemist's supplies have mechanics to create a series of basic items like acid, alchemist's fire, oil, soap, perfume, antitoxin, etc! I really like the idea of experimenting as well with how to administer alchemical creations as well, be it from a distance or from direct administration/inhalation/ingestion/application/etc. At the end of the day, I think the direction to go in involves giving them tools that they know they can use and future elements to discover and experiment with in the future. I don't think they should have everything all at once to start, but I want to encourage them to have things to find over the campaign so that they feel like they're finding their character's path rather than feeling like it's predetermined for them.
Oh yeah, to Tool section of Xanathar's is wonderful.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
It's definitely complicated working with this player, but I understand where they're coming from; just because we come from different backgrounds of D&D and gaming doesn't mean that I don't want to try to collaborate and compromise with them in any way. Currently, I'm trying to see if there's any way that I can synthesize a lot of existing ideas and suggestions that we've been discussing into a sensible arrangement of classifications of creation: things like a school of Chemistry (the pure science they're interested in- less potent than magic but more accessible), and school of Herbalism (the middle ground of science and fantasy- a compromise between the two forces at work), and a school of Alchemy (the pure magic I can most easily deliver- more potent than science but less accessible). Breaking it out like this gets more more excited as well because it almost prompts a discussion to be had about applying different principles in different situations (i.e. where one of the other two might not work as well, one might be the right avenue for pursuing a certain goal).
Again, I really do want to try my hardest to accommodate the player and be a good DM; I know I should probably be setting my foot down more on some of these things, and I definitely am trying to in areas, but I also want to make sure I'm delivering something that's actually fun for everybody and inclusive. It's been a real challenge trying to make sense of all of the proposed elements and understanding what's truly balanced and fun all in itself together.
It's definitely complicated working with this player, but I understand where they're coming from; just because we come from different backgrounds of D&D and gaming doesn't mean that I don't want to try to collaborate and compromise with them in any way. Currently, I'm trying to see if there's any way that I can synthesize a lot of existing ideas and suggestions that we've been discussing into a sensible arrangement of classifications of creation: things like a school of Chemistry (the pure science they're interested in- less potent than magic but more accessible), and school of Herbalism (the middle ground of science and fantasy- a compromise between the two forces at work), and a school of Alchemy (the pure magic I can most easily deliver- more potent than science but less accessible). Breaking it out like this gets more more excited as well because it almost prompts a discussion to be had about applying different principles in different situations (i.e. where one of the other two might not work as well, one might be the right avenue for pursuing a certain goal).
Again, I really do want to try my hardest to accommodate the player and be a good DM; I know I should probably be setting my foot down more on some of these things, and I definitely am trying to in areas, but I also want to make sure I'm delivering something that's actually fun for everybody and inclusive. It's been a real challenge trying to make sense of all of the proposed elements and understanding what's truly balanced and fun all in itself together.
As per my answer before it can be really fun working with a player to create new stuff in game, just make sure you are making them work for it either by finding/buying the raw materials needed, taking the time to complete and making relevant dice rolls to determine success using the various kits available.
Definitely- I think that it'll boil down to it really being that the simpler something is to make, the simpler it should be to acquire resources/make progress on a project and the simpler the result should be. Even if some of the simpler things are more accessible, they might not necessarily be enough of a solution to get out a pinch, and it might be important to rely on bigger, more costly, potentially riskier, and more fantastical solutions. Let them play with the low risk-low reward/high risk-high reward mentality.
I think something to keep in mind with this is the scale of what this character may be able to accomplish in a laboratory vs "field" conditions. Most "science" in the wild, even historically was largely collecting observations in nature. The proofs of concept were done in lab conditions and weren't really the sort of apparatus one could simply truck around on adventures. The water iron thing was frankly more like a Star Wars moisture farming device than anything that's actually used to collect water in actual desert environments. There's some techniques involving plastics but those are mid-late 20th century innovations. And really those would survival techniques which you could reassign to INT if you wanted to.
I'd say the easiest way to contain this player's desire to be MacGuyver and try to best your challenges with "real world working knowledge" would be to flip the table on him and go extraplanar. Land him in a place where the laws of physics don't work and physical life or death reality and environments are constructed by very powerful emotions, philosophy's etc. You can't MacGuyver your way out of the soul sucking despair found in some of the lower planes. Maybe throw him a bone by letting him play with an infernal war machine a bit.
Only allow classes and class abilities that you like, and are comfortable with. 5e is supposed to be simple. Don't go with anything that takes you ages to read.
It doesn't sound like you're really that keen on devising complex new homebrew subclasses, and I don't blame you. Just stick to the normal rules.
Regarding real-world science - your world is not the real world. Science clearly isn't the same on your world to our own, and in fact the science works on this basis: you are the DM, you get to say if it works.
Since we all have instant internet access in our pockets these days, if your player comes up with some sciency stuff to solve a problem, don't address it by trying to understand the science. You don't need to understand how a steam engine works to know that they do. So if the player comes up with something they need to provide you within 2 minutes of Google work an example of what they're suggesting working in real life - Youtube video, news article, Wikipedia, whatever they can find - and if they do then you can see that it works. But I'd be careful, since I don't really see why a DnD character on adventures would have crazy levels of scientific knowledge.
Alternatively, when your player wants to come up with something, you could go by what I'd think of as 'Steampunk tech.' In steampunk settings, characters have all manner of crazy gadgets that cannot possibly work by real science. So when he's inventing something, ask your player to make an Arcana check based on whatever you think the difficulty is. On a success, if they have the right amount of materials and time available, then they can make something that kind of works. This is likely the system that I would go with, though I'd be super restrictive on what they can make. Something like a water collection unit I'd definitely allow - it's not that impacting. I'd draw well short of motor cars.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I combed through the equipment list for items I thought could be manufactures using an alchemist's kit and I came up with this: Acid (vial), Alchemist's Fire (flask), Blasting Powder, Oil (flask), Soap. Between all those I feel there is a solution for a lot of different problems. Especially backed up with Wizard spells. I have found that using Catapult in conjunction with flasks of oil can do a lot of damage when followed with fire spells. Perhaps just giving this player the management of both downtime and money to produce this stuff as well as the inventory management to allocate their use will give the player a sense of accomplishment?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I would disagree with #!. The homebrew the player is suggesting isn't even science at all. It screams magical potions and stuff. And the homebrew is blatantly overpowered. It's not science themed at all.
I think there's an important distinction to be made here. People have been collecting dew in the desert for as long as people have lived in deserts. It doesn't require an in-depth knowledge of transpiration or water adhesion or whatever - all it requires is leaving stuff out overnight and noticing that some items were wet in the morning. This is the kind of thing I'd file under Survival, not science. And in a pre-modern desert culture it would be common knowledge. Be careful not to overthink this stuff.
As for homebrew, that's a slippery slope and you need to keep a tight reign on it. If you can't point to an existing game mechanic that gives roughly the same benefit at roughly the same level for roughly the same cost, it should not be allowed. The danger extends beyond this character - once that genie is out of the bottle, you're likely to see requests for homebrew classes in every game going forward. What you end up with is 1-2 players dominating the game while the others helplessly watch from the sidelines.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
#1. What the heck. They came in with a mystic? First session. First someone would only know about mystic likely through the internet as it was never published. And 90% of everything talking about the mystic talks about how broken it is. The guy pretty much 100% knew they would break the game with it. He's using (not even using more like exploiting)your group's trust in this person in order to try and break the game.
#2. So the guy who's not into high risk high reward makes a subclass about rolling on a RANDOM TABLE? (Edit: Not referring to alchemist artificer but the overpowered subclass that the player wanted) It seems more like an excuse on why they want to be overpowered rather than an actual reason. If they really wants to be low risk maybe he should have a different character concept. I'd say if they want to stick with wizard maybe they can go abjuration wizard for that nice defense. Also D&D isn't game where one player has all the solutions. And if one character has all the solutions it's not fun for the rest of the table as it ends up with a Mary Sue character overshadowing the rest of the players. The players work together to overcome problems. This person at least seems to me like they are trying to bring in a Mary Sue who solves every problem in their way.
#3. If the person wants to be less risky I'd advise maybe a 2 level multiclass into sorcerer or the player to just play a sorcerer. Font of magic, sorcery points, etc allows a ton of versatility with spells.
#4. I do also love the idea of very basic skill checks as suggested with alchemy supplies. Just keep a tight leash on that and if you know nothing about the crazy science, don't allow it. You shouldn't need a science degree to be a DM. And I'm a science boi myself saying this.
Actually it seemed they went with Transmutation Wizard rather than Alchemist Artificer.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
The person initially suggested an overpowered wizard subclass to the OP which was in the main post. I mean transmutation wizard also sort of fits the alchemist vibe. The wizard subclass was like alchemist just overpowered.
First of all, again- thank you guys so much for being on this topic with me; it's a slippery slope trying to juggle this player's feelings and desires while also trying to keep a handle and balance on everything as a DM. Having this input and input from other close DM friends of mine is really helpful in trying to make sense of all of this. It's incredibly validating to hear all of the feedback and thoughts you've been giving to help manage these complicated ideas. <3
Addressing this first, I think this is exactly the kind of thing that I'd prefer to hear and understand. I'd much rather see references to real world examples and cultures applying these sorts of things rather than having to read up on science. Not everybody at our table is necessarily a scientist, so I don't really want to be encouraging to pull people out of the immersion of the world's themes and 5E in general to discuss things like physics, chemistry, geology, meteorology, etc. Again, even an INT 18 character might not know all of these things just because a player might have this extensive knowledge, and even so I'm not sure how much people in this fantasy realm might know of real-world sciences. I don't want to discredit this statement though, so I'm in agreement about bringing in interesting things from the real world: as long as it's something I can wrap my head around, I'd like to believe that it's something that the world I've built can wrap its head around too. I'd like to think of myself as a rather intelligent person, but even still, I tried to explain that I'm reserving a lot of my knowledge for understanding how 5E and this universe we're playing in works more than the one we live in, but that I'm willing to adapt and learn things to integrate. If they want to explain things to me and suggest things for me to keep in mind that they'd like to make clever use of, I'm all for it; if they can make sense of it to me as a person, I can make sense of it in this world as a DM.
The only thing I want to avoid is granting advantages to a player because of resources they might be using that come from out of the game. We had to have a pretty hefty discussion about it the other night and there was a lot of frustration on their end that boiled down to: "why should I be penalized for being smart" and "why can I not make use of the advantages afforded to me by being both an intelligent character and an intelligent player." Lots of frustration about dumping things into INT only to feel like they're being handicapped by what I'm telling them is allowed... The explanation I tried to offer was that there needs to be a separation of what I can rule as a DM and what they can bring to the table as a player; I can rule that somebody might be fast or strong or charming based on what is written on their character sheet, and I can provide them with information about the world they might know based on their INT score, but I can't control how much knowledge a player actively has and how that knowledge is utilized, so I can't rule on it as easily.
Another part of this problem appears to be that they don't like the structure of XGE because it leaves them with more questions than answers; there's either only the vanilla stuff or the vast unknown of their imagination to guide them. We have been passing this homebrew around as well, and I'm hoping that maybe I can pull some concepts from this to spark their creativity. They seem to like it a lot because of the structure it offers and the clear ideas it sets, but also because it seems to make crafting more commonly accessible. Still, I'm trying really hard to consider what some of these things might mean for in-game economies of how much a potion costs to make vs. how much it would sell for. I tend to have a bit of frustration and problems with classes/mechanics that "generate instant and easy revenue for players" because of how it might make other players feel; I know a lot of my players have been frustrated before to see another character generate +100gp just by rolling a reliable skill check, and I wouldn't want to enable that kind of issue again.
This situation is just so difficult to manage because I want them to still feel special, thematic, and important, but I don't want to create an imbalance or complication at the table. Now, a lot of these conversations have just left sour tastes in our mouths, and more than anything I want to figure out how to collaborate with this player rather than butt heads about what should and shouldn't be allowed in my game world. I get the impression that they feel like me saying "I don't want to include these elements of knowledge in play" is being mistaken as "I don't care for your intelligence as a person," when in reality this is more about trying to manage the things we can and can't control and keep in check. I'm thinking that maybe it might help them to see what we could accomplish with examples from XGE, so I might start pursuing the creation of my own HB formulas as well for them to think of as templates like some of you have suggested. If any of you have suggestions on potions or magic items they could be inspired off of for this Orcish alchemist that aren't necessarily gamebreaking, please feel free to share!
Use spells for the potion effects. It's easier than homebrewing 1000000 potions every time someone wants to make a potion. I'd recommend using spell scroll costs for potion ingredient costs.
It seems a little like this player is trying to bully you. Like they realize that you are trying to be accommodating, and so they are trying to push for every inch you'll give and then some. The more you talk about it, the more it seems like you've really tried to work with them, but they aren't willing to accept any limits. If it were me, I'd be really close to just shutting them down. Say you're done with these negotiations, and they can do exactly what's written in the books, and no more. I guess you're nicer than me.
Hmm ... that homebrew looks cool, but it also looks like an entire subsystem all on its own. It's almost like giving an entirely new class feature, like spellcasting, in depth and complexity. I feel like it's a lot of work and goes against my Lazy DM principles. Also it does seem like a lot of attention and toys being given to this character. I would be cautious.
As a Lazy DM I would be more inclined to come up with an easy catch-all. How about "Bottled Help Action?" Let him come up with formulas for different potions, each of them can grant Advantage on a single roll, but each formula is specific to the roll is can boost. Takes an Action to drink and lasts for 1 minute or until used. I would adjust the DC to make the potion based on the roll it affects. Regular Skill: DC 10-15, Skill Checks that can be applied in combat or other tense situations (Grappling, Intimidating, Balancing): DC 13-17, Physical Attack Rolls (differentiate between melee and ranged): DC 15-20, Spell Attack Rolls: DC 20+
Have him experiment with different ingredients and make some of them imbibed, some of them applied like an ointment or paste, and have him record the results so he has his own little roster of potions.
Edit: Failures make poisons, but they are indistinguishable from the potion. Also, for goodness sake, don't call them all "Bottled Help Action" or they will not seem special. Each of the formulas is different and unique!
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Yeah honestly I'm starting to consider this player as possibly worthy to be kicked out of the games to avoid future "not good stuff" happening. I was pissed off by him suggesting "realism" for broken homebrew, but once I heard "Mystic" and his consistent lack of respect for the OP even after multiple talks I'm starting to think he should be possibly even removed from the group, or at least restricted to no homebrew and unearthed arcana.
I'm also definitely in the boat of the Lazy DM mentality, considering the millions of other things I'm planning on juggling for this campaign. Looking through it, there are definitely some great ideas in it that I'd at least like to try to compromise on to help them feel a better sense of structure and understanding to the ideas behind XGE crafting. I also feel like maybe we might be able to use some of the concepts in this to achieve an idea similar to "medicines and toxins" like had been mentioned previously as opposed to the big banger "magical potions" and whatnot. I think a huuuuge distinction to be made in a lot of this is that so much more can be achieved in this world thanks to magic and fantasy than with science and real world application; if they want to lean on science and realism, maybe it just isn't as magically impressive or effective. I'm down for the idea of "old family remedies" and whatnot based on real-world herbalism that leans into the concepts in this HB, but I don't think it necessarily equates to the level of magic alchemy that XGE crafting lends to.
I also really love the idea of them experimenting and basically having research notes that they can expand upon in order to create more ideas from. I think a big thing as well is that I don't exactly want them thinking that they can make a be-all-end-all potion that just combines every amazing effect ever together into one; I'd like to believe that alchemy strikes a critical balance and that it's not necessarily possible to just cram some ingredients together and then get lucky if they somehow manage to work together. If there's to be a science behind these, I'd really like for it to be rooted in the ingredients and where they come from (i.e. maybe a Troll's regenerative properties lend to a powerful regenerative healing elixir made from its blood).
Update: just found out that alchemist's supplies have mechanics to create a series of basic items like acid, alchemist's fire, oil, soap, perfume, antitoxin, etc! I really like the idea of experimenting as well with how to administer alchemical creations as well, be it from a distance or from direct administration/inhalation/ingestion/application/etc. At the end of the day, I think the direction to go in involves giving them tools that they know they can use and future elements to discover and experiment with in the future. I don't think they should have everything all at once to start, but I want to encourage them to have things to find over the campaign so that they feel like they're finding their character's path rather than feeling like it's predetermined for them.
I think this is the best way to go for this specific player. The DM gives them stuff to experiment with. But yeah I'd say you shouldn't allow the player who you've been talking about to use homebrew or unearthed arcana due to very likely exploitation of it for at least this campaign.
Oh yeah, to Tool section of Xanathar's is wonderful.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
It's definitely complicated working with this player, but I understand where they're coming from; just because we come from different backgrounds of D&D and gaming doesn't mean that I don't want to try to collaborate and compromise with them in any way. Currently, I'm trying to see if there's any way that I can synthesize a lot of existing ideas and suggestions that we've been discussing into a sensible arrangement of classifications of creation: things like a school of Chemistry (the pure science they're interested in- less potent than magic but more accessible), and school of Herbalism (the middle ground of science and fantasy- a compromise between the two forces at work), and a school of Alchemy (the pure magic I can most easily deliver- more potent than science but less accessible). Breaking it out like this gets more more excited as well because it almost prompts a discussion to be had about applying different principles in different situations (i.e. where one of the other two might not work as well, one might be the right avenue for pursuing a certain goal).
Again, I really do want to try my hardest to accommodate the player and be a good DM; I know I should probably be setting my foot down more on some of these things, and I definitely am trying to in areas, but I also want to make sure I'm delivering something that's actually fun for everybody and inclusive. It's been a real challenge trying to make sense of all of the proposed elements and understanding what's truly balanced and fun all in itself together.
As per my answer before it can be really fun working with a player to create new stuff in game, just make sure you are making them work for it either by finding/buying the raw materials needed, taking the time to complete and making relevant dice rolls to determine success using the various kits available.
Definitely- I think that it'll boil down to it really being that the simpler something is to make, the simpler it should be to acquire resources/make progress on a project and the simpler the result should be. Even if some of the simpler things are more accessible, they might not necessarily be enough of a solution to get out a pinch, and it might be important to rely on bigger, more costly, potentially riskier, and more fantastical solutions. Let them play with the low risk-low reward/high risk-high reward mentality.
I think something to keep in mind with this is the scale of what this character may be able to accomplish in a laboratory vs "field" conditions. Most "science" in the wild, even historically was largely collecting observations in nature. The proofs of concept were done in lab conditions and weren't really the sort of apparatus one could simply truck around on adventures. The water iron thing was frankly more like a Star Wars moisture farming device than anything that's actually used to collect water in actual desert environments. There's some techniques involving plastics but those are mid-late 20th century innovations. And really those would survival techniques which you could reassign to INT if you wanted to.
I'd say the easiest way to contain this player's desire to be MacGuyver and try to best your challenges with "real world working knowledge" would be to flip the table on him and go extraplanar. Land him in a place where the laws of physics don't work and physical life or death reality and environments are constructed by very powerful emotions, philosophy's etc. You can't MacGuyver your way out of the soul sucking despair found in some of the lower planes. Maybe throw him a bone by letting him play with an infernal war machine a bit.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Only allow classes and class abilities that you like, and are comfortable with. 5e is supposed to be simple. Don't go with anything that takes you ages to read.
It doesn't sound like you're really that keen on devising complex new homebrew subclasses, and I don't blame you. Just stick to the normal rules.
Regarding real-world science - your world is not the real world. Science clearly isn't the same on your world to our own, and in fact the science works on this basis: you are the DM, you get to say if it works.
Since we all have instant internet access in our pockets these days, if your player comes up with some sciency stuff to solve a problem, don't address it by trying to understand the science. You don't need to understand how a steam engine works to know that they do. So if the player comes up with something they need to provide you within 2 minutes of Google work an example of what they're suggesting working in real life - Youtube video, news article, Wikipedia, whatever they can find - and if they do then you can see that it works. But I'd be careful, since I don't really see why a DnD character on adventures would have crazy levels of scientific knowledge.
Alternatively, when your player wants to come up with something, you could go by what I'd think of as 'Steampunk tech.' In steampunk settings, characters have all manner of crazy gadgets that cannot possibly work by real science. So when he's inventing something, ask your player to make an Arcana check based on whatever you think the difficulty is. On a success, if they have the right amount of materials and time available, then they can make something that kind of works. This is likely the system that I would go with, though I'd be super restrictive on what they can make. Something like a water collection unit I'd definitely allow - it's not that impacting. I'd draw well short of motor cars.