So the high-Dex Rogue pays the same points for a 15 Dex that the Wizard pays for their 15 Int, both get a +2 stat bump from their race. Now the Rogue enjoys +3 AC, +3 to Initiative, +3 to hit with missiles and finesse weapons, +3 to DAMAGE with missiles and finesse weapons. The Wizard gets bonuses to their spellcasting but no Initiative bonus, no AC bonus etc.
The Wizard gets plenty from their Int investment. Extra spells, higher Spell Atack Bonus, higher Spell Save DC and a long list of Int based skills. Also they have multiple ways to boost AC and avoid damage. Believe me Wizards don’t need any extra help they are already a very powerful class. Don’t try and fix what isn’t broken. The classes are pretty well balanced and the advantages some classes get let each fill a special roll. If everyone got a bonus to initiative then that takes away from those that gave up something to invest in it.
So the high-Dex Rogue pays the same points for a 15 Dex that the Wizard pays for their 15 Int, both get a +2 stat bump from their race. Now the Rogue enjoys +3 AC, +3 to Initiative, +3 to hit with missiles and finesse weapons, +3 to DAMAGE with missiles and finesse weapons. The Wizard gets bonuses to their spellcasting but no Initiative bonus, no AC bonus etc.
Well, yes. Of course. Wizards aren't known for being nimble, hard to pin down or stabbing you to death. They're bookish. And they already dominate battles with their spells - there's no need to reward them with the first strike either. On the other hand, it's perfectly in line with the Rogue's class fantasy and mechanics to go first. They can't go toe to toe with enemies. They want to either take you out or retreat to safety before they get a chance to act.
There's also nothing stopping the wizard from prioritizing DEX as their second highest stat or even just letting INT be their second highest. And if they really want to be the kind of wizard that's quick to react and hard to kill, War Magic is always an option.
I'm TRYING to let characters be good at what they're good at but when the system clearly favors Dex over every other stat, I see that as a problem.
Only because you're not looking at things in context; you're just lining up the combat perks of each ability score instead of comparing the thing that matters, which is the characters. Anyone in heavy armor will match or beat the Rogue's AC (remember, they have no shield proficiency) even with 8 DEX. The Rogue also doesn't want to be putting themselves in harm's way in the first place; they don't have the HP for it and it doesn't benefit them in any way. The damage bump is also mostly inconsequential, since Rogues never get Extra Attack and their damage increasingly comes from landing Sneak Attack.
Remember, the classes aren't competing against each other - they're there to enable character archetypes. All those perks the Rogue gets from having high DEX are perfectly in keeping with the character archetype the class is meant to portray. Meanwhile the wizard gets to hurl deadly fireballs, make people fly or turn the fighter's weapon magical.
But the Rogue can MC as a Fighter, who ALSO benefits from high Dex, even in heavy armor because they STILL get an Initiative bonus.
My point is that if the high Dex is the Rogue's stock in trade and the high Int is the Wizard's stock in trade then why not let the Dex benefit the Initiative for the Rogue and the Int do the same thing for the Wizard? Sure, thinking faster won't help you dodge an arrow (so no AC bonus) but shouldn't being one of the smartest guys on the planets help you calculate what to do even a LITTLE faster without having to take a Feat?
But the Rogue can MC as a Fighter, who ALSO benefits from high Dex, even in heavy armor because they STILL get an Initiative bonus.
My point is that if the high Dex is the Rogue's stock in trade and the high Int is the Wizard's stock in trade then why not let the Dex benefit the Initiative for the Rogue and the Int do the same thing for the Wizard? Sure, thinking faster won't help you dodge an arrow (so no AC bonus) but shouldn't being one of the smartest guys on the planets help you calculate what to do even a LITTLE faster without having to take a Feat?
The Wizard can also MC as a Fighter *shrug*
And sure, the high Int Wizard might, and should, be able to calculate what to do faster than a low Int Rogue, but the high Dex Rogue should be able to act on it faster.
Besides, Initiative is really not all that important. It's really only important on the first round. From then on, it doesn't matter. (Sure, for some classes/builds it can be very important... Assassin, for example. But overall, consider any two characters: they'll be trading actions all combat. Who goes "first" only matters in round 1. After that, they each go after the other.)
I think you're overstating the benefits of high Dex. High Dex only means high AC for lightly or non-armored characters: Sorcerers, Wizards, Monks, Barbarians, Rogues, Bards, and some Warlocks. Sorcerers and Wizards get Mage Armor and Shield. Monks and Barbarians get Wis and Con bonuses to AC (respectively). Warlocks can get Mage Armor, and can get Medium Armor proficiency, too. Rogues and Bards, then, are left with "just" Dex bonuses to AC. Everybody else gets they Dex bonus capped at +2 or +0 (medium and heavy armor, respectively).
Additionally, the "double-dipping" of stats is present across the board: Barbarians get extra HPs AND extra AC from Con, Warlocks get better to-hit bonuses AND damage from Cha. Fighters get better to-hit AND damage from Str. Sorcerers and Wizards don't get better damage from their primary skill, but then arguably they don't need to: spells are usually more damaging than weapons. (Getting a better Spell Save DC from their stat is really the same as getting a better to-hit bonus, functionally.) So, Rogues get better to-hit, damage, and initiative from Dex. Seems fine. Yes, it can make for "easy" to build characters (just focus on Dex, nevermind the rest of the stats), but you can do the same with a Fighter (go all Str, wear full plate), Wizard (go full Int), etc. *shrug*
Or accept you can’t be good at everything. The rules makes distinctions so characters each have times they shine. Kind of abused if we keep giving the high Dex/Wis characters all the joy isn’t it?
To be honest, I was considering trying to give each class their own Initiative bonus based on their primary stat so Wizards would use Int, Str-based characters would use St etc.
There's already class features for that (see War Magic for wizards, Swashbuckler for Rogues, Gloom Stalker for Rangers.)
This ties back Stone_Goliath said: let people be good at the things they're supposed to be good at. Agile characters are supposed to be fast to react in combat. If someone wants to start with high initiative they can boost their DEX, pick a subclass that grants bonuses to initiative or take the Alert feat.
So the high-Dex Rogue pays the same points for a 15 Dex that the Wizard pays for their 15 Int, both get a +2 stat bump from their race. Now the Rogue enjoys +3 AC, +3 to Initiative, +3 to hit with missiles and finesse weapons, +3 to DAMAGE with missiles and finesse weapons. The Wizard gets bonuses to their spellcasting but no Initiative bonus, no AC bonus etc.
I'm TRYING to let characters be good at what they're good at but when the system clearly favors Dex over every other stat, I see that as a problem.
Except that is the bulk of what Dex does for the Rogue, while the Wizard's Int supports spells that can do things impossible for the Rogues and others.
Like bend your mind with Charm, Fear, Domination. Slow your actions. Banish you from the plane of existence. Polymorph you into a frog. Possess your body through Magic Jar... and that's just a few options that take you out of the fight regardless of your HPs. Never mind all the attack roll spells that can bypass defenses, or target weak defenses.
Are we really comparing apples with apples, or are there oranges in the mix?
But the Rogue can MC as a Fighter, who ALSO benefits from high Dex, even in heavy armor because they STILL get an Initiative bonus.
My point is that if the high Dex is the Rogue's stock in trade and the high Int is the Wizard's stock in trade then why not let the Dex benefit the Initiative for the Rogue and the Int do the same thing for the Wizard? Sure, thinking faster won't help you dodge an arrow (so no AC bonus) but shouldn't being one of the smartest guys on the planets help you calculate what to do even a LITTLE faster without having to take a Feat?
The Wizard can also MC as a Fighter *shrug*
And sure, the high Int Wizard might, and should, be able to calculate what to do faster than a low Int Rogue, but the high Dex Rogue should be able to act on it faster.
Besides, Initiative is really not all that important. It's really only important on the first round. From then on, it doesn't matter. (Sure, for some classes/builds it can be very important... Assassin, for example. But overall, consider any two characters: they'll be trading actions all combat. Who goes "first" only matters in round 1. After that, they each go after the other.)
I think you're overstating the benefits of high Dex. High Dex only means high AC for lightly or non-armored characters: Sorcerers, Wizards, Monks, Barbarians, Rogues, Bards, and some Warlocks. Sorcerers and Wizards get Mage Armor and Shield. Monks and Barbarians get Wis and Con bonuses to AC (respectively). Warlocks can get Mage Armor, and can get Medium Armor proficiency, too. Rogues and Bards, then, are left with "just" Dex bonuses to AC. Everybody else gets they Dex bonus capped at +2 or +0 (medium and heavy armor, respectively).
Additionally, the "double-dipping" of stats is present across the board: Barbarians get extra HPs AND extra AC from Con, Warlocks get better to-hit bonuses AND damage from Cha. Fighters get better to-hit AND damage from Str. Sorcerers and Wizards don't get better damage from their primary skill, but then arguably they don't need to: spells are usually more damaging than weapons. (Getting a better Spell Save DC from their stat is really the same as getting a better to-hit bonus, functionally.) So, Rogues get better to-hit, damage, and initiative from Dex. Seems fine. Yes, it can make for "easy" to build characters (just focus on Dex, nevermind the rest of the stats), but you can do the same with a Fighter (go all Str, wear full plate), Wizard (go full Int), etc. *shrug*
Actually I find that in mid to high level play, it seems that monster saving throw stats scale much higher than spell caster save DC unless your DM is allowing magic items which boost spellcasting DC. This has the effect of making martial characters much more reliable from a damage perspective especially because magic items which boost to hit seem so much more accepted in high level play. The action economy also greatly favors martial classes giving far more opportunities to engage in their primary function, attacking, than magic users casting spells. The restriction of only a cantrip after a bonus action spell is further evidence of the favoritism to martial classes.
But martial classes attacks are focused on one creature at a time and when they miss they do 0 damage while when the targets of spells make their save they take 1/2 damage unless they have a special ability and area of affect spells affect a lot of opponents, not just one.
But martial classes attacks are focused on one creature at a time and when they miss they do 0 damage while when the targets of spells make their save they take 1/2 damage unless they have a special ability and area of affect spells affect a lot of opponents, not just one.
Its balanced.
If my character has a melee weapon and three enemies within range, I can target one per Attack that I have. If I have a missile weapon this is even better. If you're a martial character and you're focused on one target then either you're doing it wrong or the target is the boss in which case the mage should be targeting them too
Fair point, but compare that to even Burning Hands which a 1st level sorcerer or wizard can cast. Let alone higher level burst spells that can easily affect 5-8 opponents at once.
Fair point but you have to also consider that melee typically gets much higher minimum damage than spells. Spells are much more luck based. Take your burning hands example cast by a level 5 wizard with 18 Intelligence. Damage is 3d6. On average it will do 9 points of fire damage to whatever it hits however it can do a minimum of 3 damage. Contrast vs a level 5 barbarian with 18 strength using a greataxe and using the signature rage ability which is up nearly every fight. Damage is 1d12+4+2 x 2 attacks at level 5. Average damage is 6+4+2 or 12 damage against 2 opponents. Minimum damage is 7 against 2 opponents.
I know you could theoretically hit more than 2 with Burning hands but really it's not that common I've found. This doesn't consider either that critical hits are FAR more prevelant on martial classes than casters. I know this is all just my personal experience and what ive heard from people playing on podcasts such as Critical Role. And it's fine I guess I just know that single rounds of damage over 50, 60 or 70 points seems far more common with our barbarian, fighter and rogue than with our wizard, Druid or Cleric....
Fair point but you have to also consider that melee typically gets much higher minimum damage than spells. Spells are much more luck based.
Not really, unless you're talking specifically about cantrips. And even then, evocation wizards, draconic sorcerers, non-blade warlocks and half of all cleric domains get to add their spellcasting mod to their damage, and evocation wizards even get to deal half damage with their saving throw cantrips.
Attacks can miss and deal 0 damage; saving throw spells usually still deal half damage on a successful save. Also, the more dice you throw, the less likely the minimum becomes and the more likely you are to get numbers close to the average. Seeing a 3 on a 3d6 only happens 1/(6*6*6) = 1 out of 216 times. On a Fireball (8d6) the probability is 1/1,679,616. Taking Fireball as an example again, with 8d6 the average is 28 and you have roughly:
I know you could theoretically hit more than 2 with Burning hands but really it's not that common I've found. This doesn't consider either that critical hits are FAR more prevelant on martial classes than casters.
That's mainly because martial classes get to make 2-3 attack rolls with Extra Attack and possibly two-weapon fighting. However, while their crits are more common, they're also weaker. A wizard casting Fire Bolt only gets one chance to critical, but if they do, they're getting an extra 2d10 damage at 5th level, while the Barbarian gets 1d12.
Like I said perhaps this has just been my experience. Seems though that in any given game I play or listen to, consistently the casters are generally less effective in combat than the martial classes. Between magic resistance, legendary resistance and the fact that casters have to decide whether this fight is worth the spell slots or quickly become useless at low levels vs a short rest and a martial class is back to more or less full functionality is grating at times.
Perhaps this is due to the levels of campaigns I have played- never played above level 10 maybe casters get awesome but then again they get so few higher level slots.
Frequently recall Scanlan and Keyleth of Critical Role complaining about not knowing what to do because they "gotta save that spell for later" and using a painfully low level spell at level 15+ and doing like 5 points of Thunder damage to a CR20 creature lol.
It's the levels you've been playing at, it appears you stop right round the point that mages become fun to play, rather than hard work to keep alive
You should also be crafting your own Scrolls and potions to increase your arsenal, then you become less prone to poking stuff with a stick because you're out of spells
Not sure about the rest of the community, but our current DM is very much against the 'characters as craftsmen' thing. When I joined the game I wanted to try the new Artificier or some other character that would be making gadgets and inventions and he shot me down flat. 'That's what the NPCs in town are for' he said. I can see his point, especially because the rest of the party (except the wizard) would be standing around while I work but we're playing through Curse of Strahd and money comes in by the penny, not the pound. The only reason I have Plate armor is because I inherited it from the Paladin who changed his character. No WAY could I have afforded a set on our spoils so far.
So the idea of 'mages can make their own shit' doesn't always fly. Just sayin...
Not sure about the rest of the community, but our current DM is very much against the 'characters as craftsmen' thing. When I joined the game I wanted to try the new Artificier or some other character that would be making gadgets and inventions and he shot me down flat. 'That's what the NPCs in town are for' he said. I can see his point, especially because the rest of the party (except the wizard) would be standing around while I work but we're playing through Curse of Strahd and money comes in by the penny, not the pound. The only reason I have Plate armor is because I inherited it from the Paladin who changed his character. No WAY could I have afforded a set on our spoils so far.
So the idea of 'mages can make their own shit' doesn't always fly. Just sayin...
I'm curious now... What purpose does this DM see for having artisan tool proficiencies? Does he allow you to replace them with something you'll actually get to use?
(Also, as a side-note-- The rest of the party doesn't have to sit around if you're doing crafting! Crafting should only happen in downtime (you can't make a suit of armor in an hour), and everyone should get to do a downtime activity. So everyone gets their 'turn' of something to progress their character's interests. One person might choose to craft something, another person tries to establish some contacts, someone goes shopping, someone does some labour for extra cash, someone researches in the library... etc. etc. etc.)
Fully agree with MellieDM on this one. Our team just finished a mini-campaign and so between then and our next session the DM told us to level up and that we are having a 6 month interlude. These are ideal times to be crafting stuff, with his guidance and approval of course. For instance in our final battle we defeated an Undead Earth Elemental Dragon, a Chain Devil and a Succubus. My character, being the lizardfolk Druid with a blacksmithing feat, naturally harvested the bodies. So from that in my 6 months I will crafting from the bodies as follows:
1- 3lbs of dragon scales (terrible harvesting roll on the dragon lol) to craft a +1 Shield which grants resistance to bludgeoning, piercing and slashing from non-magical attacks
2- 60lbs of chain devil chains will create a +1 chain armor shirt which does 1d4 magical piercing damage when the wearer is hit with a melee attack
3- Succubus wings will be woven/tanned into a belt which will allow for the casting of a 3rd level Fly spell 1x per day.
Either your DM needs to let you make loot or he needs to be generous in the loot you receive after battle. Can't be stingy with both.
The Wizard gets plenty from their Int investment. Extra spells, higher Spell Atack Bonus, higher Spell Save DC and a long list of Int based skills. Also they have multiple ways to boost AC and avoid damage. Believe me Wizards don’t need any extra help they are already a very powerful class. Don’t try and fix what isn’t broken. The classes are pretty well balanced and the advantages some classes get let each fill a special roll. If everyone got a bonus to initiative then that takes away from those that gave up something to invest in it.
Well, yes. Of course. Wizards aren't known for being nimble, hard to pin down or stabbing you to death. They're bookish. And they already dominate battles with their spells - there's no need to reward them with the first strike either. On the other hand, it's perfectly in line with the Rogue's class fantasy and mechanics to go first. They can't go toe to toe with enemies. They want to either take you out or retreat to safety before they get a chance to act.
There's also nothing stopping the wizard from prioritizing DEX as their second highest stat or even just letting INT be their second highest. And if they really want to be the kind of wizard that's quick to react and hard to kill, War Magic is always an option.
Only because you're not looking at things in context; you're just lining up the combat perks of each ability score instead of comparing the thing that matters, which is the characters. Anyone in heavy armor will match or beat the Rogue's AC (remember, they have no shield proficiency) even with 8 DEX. The Rogue also doesn't want to be putting themselves in harm's way in the first place; they don't have the HP for it and it doesn't benefit them in any way. The damage bump is also mostly inconsequential, since Rogues never get Extra Attack and their damage increasingly comes from landing Sneak Attack.
Remember, the classes aren't competing against each other - they're there to enable character archetypes. All those perks the Rogue gets from having high DEX are perfectly in keeping with the character archetype the class is meant to portray. Meanwhile the wizard gets to hurl deadly fireballs, make people fly or turn the fighter's weapon magical.
But the Rogue can MC as a Fighter, who ALSO benefits from high Dex, even in heavy armor because they STILL get an Initiative bonus.
My point is that if the high Dex is the Rogue's stock in trade and the high Int is the Wizard's stock in trade then why not let the Dex benefit the Initiative for the Rogue and the Int do the same thing for the Wizard? Sure, thinking faster won't help you dodge an arrow (so no AC bonus) but shouldn't being one of the smartest guys on the planets help you calculate what to do even a LITTLE faster without having to take a Feat?
The Wizard can also MC as a Fighter *shrug*
And sure, the high Int Wizard might, and should, be able to calculate what to do faster than a low Int Rogue, but the high Dex Rogue should be able to act on it faster.
Besides, Initiative is really not all that important. It's really only important on the first round. From then on, it doesn't matter. (Sure, for some classes/builds it can be very important... Assassin, for example. But overall, consider any two characters: they'll be trading actions all combat. Who goes "first" only matters in round 1. After that, they each go after the other.)
I think you're overstating the benefits of high Dex. High Dex only means high AC for lightly or non-armored characters: Sorcerers, Wizards, Monks, Barbarians, Rogues, Bards, and some Warlocks. Sorcerers and Wizards get Mage Armor and Shield. Monks and Barbarians get Wis and Con bonuses to AC (respectively). Warlocks can get Mage Armor, and can get Medium Armor proficiency, too. Rogues and Bards, then, are left with "just" Dex bonuses to AC. Everybody else gets they Dex bonus capped at +2 or +0 (medium and heavy armor, respectively).
Additionally, the "double-dipping" of stats is present across the board: Barbarians get extra HPs AND extra AC from Con, Warlocks get better to-hit bonuses AND damage from Cha. Fighters get better to-hit AND damage from Str. Sorcerers and Wizards don't get better damage from their primary skill, but then arguably they don't need to: spells are usually more damaging than weapons. (Getting a better Spell Save DC from their stat is really the same as getting a better to-hit bonus, functionally.) So, Rogues get better to-hit, damage, and initiative from Dex. Seems fine. Yes, it can make for "easy" to build characters (just focus on Dex, nevermind the rest of the stats), but you can do the same with a Fighter (go all Str, wear full plate), Wizard (go full Int), etc. *shrug*
Except that is the bulk of what Dex does for the Rogue, while the Wizard's Int supports spells that can do things impossible for the Rogues and others.
Like bend your mind with Charm, Fear, Domination. Slow your actions. Banish you from the plane of existence. Polymorph you into a frog. Possess your body through Magic Jar... and that's just a few options that take you out of the fight regardless of your HPs. Never mind all the attack roll spells that can bypass defenses, or target weak defenses.
Are we really comparing apples with apples, or are there oranges in the mix?
Actually I find that in mid to high level play, it seems that monster saving throw stats scale much higher than spell caster save DC unless your DM is allowing magic items which boost spellcasting DC. This has the effect of making martial characters much more reliable from a damage perspective especially because magic items which boost to hit seem so much more accepted in high level play. The action economy also greatly favors martial classes giving far more opportunities to engage in their primary function, attacking, than magic users casting spells. The restriction of only a cantrip after a bonus action spell is further evidence of the favoritism to martial classes.
But martial classes attacks are focused on one creature at a time and when they miss they do 0 damage while when the targets of spells make their save they take 1/2 damage unless they have a special ability and area of affect spells affect a lot of opponents, not just one.
Its balanced.
Professional computer geek
If my character has a melee weapon and three enemies within range, I can target one per Attack that I have. If I have a missile weapon this is even better. If you're a martial character and you're focused on one target then either you're doing it wrong or the target is the boss in which case the mage should be targeting them too
Fair point, but compare that to even Burning Hands which a 1st level sorcerer or wizard can cast. Let alone higher level burst spells that can easily affect 5-8 opponents at once.
Professional computer geek
Fair point but you have to also consider that melee typically gets much higher minimum damage than spells. Spells are much more luck based. Take your burning hands example cast by a level 5 wizard with 18 Intelligence. Damage is 3d6. On average it will do 9 points of fire damage to whatever it hits however it can do a minimum of 3 damage. Contrast vs a level 5 barbarian with 18 strength using a greataxe and using the signature rage ability which is up nearly every fight. Damage is 1d12+4+2 x 2 attacks at level 5. Average damage is 6+4+2 or 12 damage against 2 opponents. Minimum damage is 7 against 2 opponents.
I know you could theoretically hit more than 2 with Burning hands but really it's not that common I've found. This doesn't consider either that critical hits are FAR more prevelant on martial classes than casters. I know this is all just my personal experience and what ive heard from people playing on podcasts such as Critical Role. And it's fine I guess I just know that single rounds of damage over 50, 60 or 70 points seems far more common with our barbarian, fighter and rogue than with our wizard, Druid or Cleric....
The simplest homebrew resolution would be to have climbing run off of the average of both strength and dex bonus,
All plans turn into, run into the room waving a sword and see what happens from there, once the first die gets rolled
Not really, unless you're talking specifically about cantrips. And even then, evocation wizards, draconic sorcerers, non-blade warlocks and half of all cleric domains get to add their spellcasting mod to their damage, and evocation wizards even get to deal half damage with their saving throw cantrips.
Attacks can miss and deal 0 damage; saving throw spells usually still deal half damage on a successful save. Also, the more dice you throw, the less likely the minimum becomes and the more likely you are to get numbers close to the average. Seeing a 3 on a 3d6 only happens 1/(6*6*6) = 1 out of 216 times. On a Fireball (8d6) the probability is 1/1,679,616. Taking Fireball as an example again, with 8d6 the average is 28 and you have roughly:
You can see this easily in Anydice. The sum of multiple dice quickly approaches a normal distribution once you have 3+ dice. (2 dice gives you a triangle, 1 die is flat.) Also see the 68-95-99.7 rule.
That's mainly because martial classes get to make 2-3 attack rolls with Extra Attack and possibly two-weapon fighting. However, while their crits are more common, they're also weaker. A wizard casting Fire Bolt only gets one chance to critical, but if they do, they're getting an extra 2d10 damage at 5th level, while the Barbarian gets 1d12.
Like I said perhaps this has just been my experience. Seems though that in any given game I play or listen to, consistently the casters are generally less effective in combat than the martial classes. Between magic resistance, legendary resistance and the fact that casters have to decide whether this fight is worth the spell slots or quickly become useless at low levels vs a short rest and a martial class is back to more or less full functionality is grating at times.
Perhaps this is due to the levels of campaigns I have played- never played above level 10 maybe casters get awesome but then again they get so few higher level slots.
Frequently recall Scanlan and Keyleth of Critical Role complaining about not knowing what to do because they "gotta save that spell for later" and using a painfully low level spell at level 15+ and doing like 5 points of Thunder damage to a CR20 creature lol.
It's the levels you've been playing at, it appears you stop right round the point that mages become fun to play, rather than hard work to keep alive
You should also be crafting your own Scrolls and potions to increase your arsenal, then you become less prone to poking stuff with a stick because you're out of spells
All plans turn into, run into the room waving a sword and see what happens from there, once the first die gets rolled
Not sure about the rest of the community, but our current DM is very much against the 'characters as craftsmen' thing. When I joined the game I wanted to try the new Artificier or some other character that would be making gadgets and inventions and he shot me down flat. 'That's what the NPCs in town are for' he said. I can see his point, especially because the rest of the party (except the wizard) would be standing around while I work but we're playing through Curse of Strahd and money comes in by the penny, not the pound. The only reason I have Plate armor is because I inherited it from the Paladin who changed his character. No WAY could I have afforded a set on our spoils so far.
So the idea of 'mages can make their own shit' doesn't always fly. Just sayin...
I'm curious now... What purpose does this DM see for having artisan tool proficiencies? Does he allow you to replace them with something you'll actually get to use?
(Also, as a side-note-- The rest of the party doesn't have to sit around if you're doing crafting! Crafting should only happen in downtime (you can't make a suit of armor in an hour), and everyone should get to do a downtime activity. So everyone gets their 'turn' of something to progress their character's interests. One person might choose to craft something, another person tries to establish some contacts, someone goes shopping, someone does some labour for extra cash, someone researches in the library... etc. etc. etc.)
Fully agree with MellieDM on this one. Our team just finished a mini-campaign and so between then and our next session the DM told us to level up and that we are having a 6 month interlude. These are ideal times to be crafting stuff, with his guidance and approval of course. For instance in our final battle we defeated an Undead Earth Elemental Dragon, a Chain Devil and a Succubus. My character, being the lizardfolk Druid with a blacksmithing feat, naturally harvested the bodies. So from that in my 6 months I will crafting from the bodies as follows:
1- 3lbs of dragon scales (terrible harvesting roll on the dragon lol) to craft a +1 Shield which grants resistance to bludgeoning, piercing and slashing from non-magical attacks
2- 60lbs of chain devil chains will create a +1 chain armor shirt which does 1d4 magical piercing damage when the wearer is hit with a melee attack
3- Succubus wings will be woven/tanned into a belt which will allow for the casting of a 3rd level Fly spell 1x per day.
Either your DM needs to let you make loot or he needs to be generous in the loot you receive after battle. Can't be stingy with both.