Following Raw and reading the last sentence in the Artificer Initiate feat from beginning to end:
You gain proficiency with one type of artisan’s tools of your choice, and you can use that type of tool as a spellcasting focus for any spell you cast that uses Intelligence as its spellcasting ability.
Feats are an optional rule but if allowed in your game usually allow you to do something extra or something different than what the general rules allow.
Despite how clear or not some things are written different interpretations are possible.
Because feats allow you to do specific things that the general rules usually don't I tend to follow them to the letter of the law, not adding or subtracting anything that isn't written out right there in the feat. I do not assume that this means you follow any general rule despite what is written as this may be or not be what was intended in the design of the feat. I simply go by what is written in that feat.
This feat only says you can use artisan's tools of your choice as a spellcasting focus for any spell you cast that uses Intelligence as its spellcasting ability.
Parts of the sentence structure such as... any spell... and... uses Intelligence as its spellcasting ability... suggest an exception to how you would normally cast spells. It creates a unique condition whereby if you only take that entire sentence at surface value you can actually use a focus to cast a spell, and not only that but just by following the conditions and restrictions put forth within the feat alone you can do something that you normally wouldn't be able to do. That being, cast a spell by using a focus even if that spell doesn't have an M component.
This flies in the face of the general rule which normally wouldn't allow this but if you try to adhere to the general rule then you end up breaking the specific one created here and you further limit the conditions set forth within the feat. Instead of now just having to worry about which spells use intelligence as their spellcasting ability you have to check if they have an M component or not. The rule for this is a general one and is not referenced within the feat. Therefore a valid interpretation of the rules would allow for you to use the artisan's tools that you chose to cast a spell that uses Intelligence as its spellcasting ability... even of that spell does not have an M component.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
You are talking about what the rule suggests, but we are asking what it says. Again, and for the probably actually 30th time, nothing in the feat suggest it changes how spells are cast, only what you can use as a focus. That is a problem. And again "your wizard spells" suggest all the spells you have selected via the wizard's spellcasting feature, yet you treat that differently based on no rule text. That is a problem.
This isn't about different interpretations. This is about being able to do what the rules say, and not doing what isn't in the rules. That is the basis of your OP of this entire thread. The rules say what they do, and anything they don't say isn't rules.
Your invention that this feat changes how spells are cast is entirely your own assertion. It is based on no text. You are wrong. It is really that simple. Your inventions are not rules.
I am not wrong. I have invented nothing about this feat.
I am simply reading it and applying what it says.
You and others are trying to impose the general rules for spellcasting as further limitations on just what spells are allowed by this feat.
I am simply adhering to the exact wording of the feat, even if this means I am using a focus to cast spells without an M component.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
I am not wrong. I have invented nothing about this feat.
No, apparently, you have invented something for every feat.
If a feat (or class feature, or...) were to override part of the general rules, it would say so, explicitly. For example, War Caster has to straight up say "[y]ou can perform the somatic components of spells even when you have weapons or a shield in one or both hands" and Subtle Spell metamagic has to straight up say "[w]hen you cast a spell, you can spend 1 sorcery point to cast it without any somatic or verbal components."
The Artificer class has to include even more verbiage: "You produce your artificer spell effects through your tools. You must have a spellcasting focus—specifically thieves’ tools or some kind of artisan’s tool—in hand when you cast any spell with this Spellcasting feature (meaning the spell has an “M” component when you cast it)." The Artificer Initiate feat, despite having the word "artificer" in its name, does not include those rules. It does not do what you want it to do. It says no more and no less than, for example, the Awakened Spellbook feature says ("You can use the book as a spellcasting focus for your wizard spells.") It does not do what you want it to do.
You can keep posting, but you're still wrong.
But hey, play how you want (provided your DM and playgroup are happy with it).
The feat doesn't say you add an M component... so yes you can cast Magic Missile with the feat.
The conclusion is wrong here. The feat doesn't say you add an M component... so you can't use a focus with a spell that doesn't have an M component. The feat doesn't say you can. No rule does. Anywhere.
This part literally says "the feat doesn't say you can do it, so you can do it."
Constructive debate is basically impossible here. Maybe a mod can lock it?
Seconded
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)
I agree that if this thread continues in its off-topic discussion it should probably be locked. It is unfortunate though as the original topic of this thread, the Chemical Mastery feature, has to my knowledge rather unique language to it.
Following Raw and reading the last sentence in the Artificer Initiate feat from beginning to end:
Feats are an optional rule but if allowed in your game usually allow you to do something extra or something different than what the general rules allow.
Despite how clear or not some things are written different interpretations are possible.
Because feats allow you to do specific things that the general rules usually don't I tend to follow them to the letter of the law, not adding or subtracting anything that isn't written out right there in the feat. I do not assume that this means you follow any general rule despite what is written as this may be or not be what was intended in the design of the feat. I simply go by what is written in that feat.
This feat only says you can use artisan's tools of your choice as a spellcasting focus for any spell you cast that uses Intelligence as its spellcasting ability.
Parts of the sentence structure such as... any spell... and... uses Intelligence as its spellcasting ability... suggest an exception to how you would normally cast spells. It creates a unique condition whereby if you only take that entire sentence at surface value you can actually use a focus to cast a spell, and not only that but just by following the conditions and restrictions put forth within the feat alone you can do something that you normally wouldn't be able to do. That being, cast a spell by using a focus even if that spell doesn't have an M component.
This flies in the face of the general rule which normally wouldn't allow this but if you try to adhere to the general rule then you end up breaking the specific one created here and you further limit the conditions set forth within the feat. Instead of now just having to worry about which spells use intelligence as their spellcasting ability you have to check if they have an M component or not. The rule for this is a general one and is not referenced within the feat. Therefore a valid interpretation of the rules would allow for you to use the artisan's tools that you chose to cast a spell that uses Intelligence as its spellcasting ability... even of that spell does not have an M component.
You are talking about what the rule suggests, but we are asking what it says. Again, and for the probably actually 30th time, nothing in the feat suggest it changes how spells are cast, only what you can use as a focus. That is a problem. And again "your wizard spells" suggest all the spells you have selected via the wizard's spellcasting feature, yet you treat that differently based on no rule text. That is a problem.
This isn't about different interpretations. This is about being able to do what the rules say, and not doing what isn't in the rules. That is the basis of your OP of this entire thread. The rules say what they do, and anything they don't say isn't rules.
Your invention that this feat changes how spells are cast is entirely your own assertion. It is based on no text. You are wrong. It is really that simple. Your inventions are not rules.
I am not wrong. I have invented nothing about this feat.
I am simply reading it and applying what it says.
You and others are trying to impose the general rules for spellcasting as further limitations on just what spells are allowed by this feat.
I am simply adhering to the exact wording of the feat, even if this means I am using a focus to cast spells without an M component.
You read the feat.
...
Then you post here something that the feat doesn't say. In between *MUST* be invention. Because the feat doesn't say it.
Again, a direct question: does that mean I can cast gate without paying the costly component?
No, apparently, you have invented something for every feat.
If a feat (or class feature, or...) were to override part of the general rules, it would say so, explicitly. For example, War Caster has to straight up say "[y]ou can perform the somatic components of spells even when you have weapons or a shield in one or both hands" and Subtle Spell metamagic has to straight up say "[w]hen you cast a spell, you can spend 1 sorcery point to cast it without any somatic or verbal components."
The Artificer class has to include even more verbiage: "You produce your artificer spell effects through your tools. You must have a spellcasting focus—specifically thieves’ tools or some kind of artisan’s tool—in hand when you cast any spell with this Spellcasting feature (meaning the spell has an “M” component when you cast it)." The Artificer Initiate feat, despite having the word "artificer" in its name, does not include those rules. It does not do what you want it to do. It says no more and no less than, for example, the Awakened Spellbook feature says ("You can use the book as a spellcasting focus for your wizard spells.") It does not do what you want it to do.
You can keep posting, but you're still wrong.
But hey, play how you want (provided your DM and playgroup are happy with it).
The conclusion is wrong here. The feat doesn't say you add an M component... so you can't use a focus with a spell that doesn't have an M component. The feat doesn't say you can. No rule does. Anywhere.
This part literally says "the feat doesn't say you can do it, so you can do it."
Seconded
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)
I agree that if this thread continues in its off-topic discussion it should probably be locked. It is unfortunate though as the original topic of this thread, the Chemical Mastery feature, has to my knowledge rather unique language to it.
Also my advice to everyone when they observe someone arguing in bad faith or otherwise violating the site rules and guidelines(https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/news-announcements/135626-site-rules-guidelines) is to not respond and simply report the non-compliant behavior.
This thread has gone wildly and irrecoverably off topic, so locking it down
Find my D&D Beyond articles here