The only way to accomplish this is via Artificer's Repeating Shot on a Crossbow, Hand. You do not have to be an Artificer yourself, but good luck convincing a party member to commit one of their Infusions for your use.
But isn't that the point of the Artificer infusions? To help the other party members?
.... considering Artificers eventually get a bonus to saves for the number of items they personally have Attuned ... the first and default assumption for "who gets X infusion" is and always should be "the artificer who made it".
But that's only at level 20 when you can infuse up to 12 items so there is hopefully room to share. Also, Artificers can always find stuff from other sources to attune to. Having more than one high level artificer in a group is probably a good way to mess up the game. :D
But that's only at level 20 when you can infuse up to 12 items so there is hopefully room to share. Also, Artificers can always find stuff from other sources to attune to. Having more than one high level artificer in a group is probably a good way to mess up the game. :D
At level 20, the Artificer can only have SIX items Infused at once. They will know 12 possible Infusions to choose between, but, still: only six at once.
Importantly, also:
At 10th level, they gain the ability to Attune 4 items (rather than the usual 3) .... the exact same level when they gain their 4th active Infusion.
The same thing happens at level 14 - they gain a 5th active Infusion, and the ability to Attune a fifth item.
And at 18th, it happens yet again: they gain a sixth active Infusion, right alongside the ability to Attune a sixth item.
...
To me, that makes the intent pretty clear: those Infusions are generally meant for the Artificer's personal use, not sharing by default. If he does, then he's being especially generous. But you shouldn't expect it of him.
With the new shield feat from UA, you could fire any crossbow, then let go with one hand (in the case of a two-handed crossbow) and use your object interaction to grab your shield. This is still only a partial solution as the next round, you would need to use your object interaction to remove the shield, then you would have that free hand necessary for reloading and firing, but the end of the round would find you without your shield on.
But that's only at level 20 when you can infuse up to 12 items so there is hopefully room to share. Also, Artificers can always find stuff from other sources to attune to. Having more than one high level artificer in a group is probably a good way to mess up the game. :D
At level 20, the Artificer can only have SIX items Infused at once. They will know 12 possible Infusions to choose between, but, still: only six at once.
Importantly, also:
At 10th level, they gain the ability to Attune 4 items (rather than the usual 3) .... the exact same level when they gain their 4th active Infusion.
The same thing happens at level 14 - they gain a 5th active Infusion, and the ability to Attune a fifth item.
And at 18th, it happens yet again: they gain a sixth active Infusion, right alongside the ability to Attune a sixth item.
...
To me, that makes the intent pretty clear: those Infusions are generally meant for the Artificer's personal use, not sharing by default. If he does, then he's being especially generous. But you shouldn't expect it of him.
You're right about the number of infusions, my bad.
That said, nothing stops to Artificer to share their infusions. Especially since they can gain the benefit from their 20th level spell from any attuned item, not just their own infused ones. So the number of infused items doesn't really, really matter until level 20. So the point still stands, there's no reason why an Artficer wouldn't be able to share their stuff. :)
I'm saying, don't expect them to (where "expect" comes very close to "demand"). I think the class is balanced around the idea that the Artificer is infusing items for themselves, not as a sort of "whole party walking armory".
So, round 2: drop shield, reload crossbow, [free item-interaction] pick shield back up.
Except unequipping (doffing) the shield is a distinct use of 1 Action, just as reequipping it again (donning) is another distinct use of 1 Action. Shenanigans don't work here.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I'm saying, don't expect them to (where "expect" comes very close to "demand"). I think the class is balanced around the idea that the Artificer is infusing items for themselves, not as a sort of "whole party walking armory".
Sure, but not everyone plays with egoists who don't like to share the loot. :) Either way, in a discussion on what an Artificer *can* do it's a bit pointless to bring up as an argument what an Artificer's player *might* do. :)
And that's what Infusions are - Artificer's class abilities.
SMDH
Relax, you are over-reacting. No-one is forcing you to share your Artificer's infusions if you don't want to. The point is that they can solve the problem presented (how to reload while also using a shield).
Also, people are free to play artificers any way they want. Some might want to keep their infusions to themselves, others might not. It's not any different than say, asking a cleric for a healing spell or a paladin to use lay on hands to cure a condition. But all that is way off topic so maybe we should leave it at that?
My Artificer player has a vision in his head of a heavy crossbow/shield combination, I am waiting for his sketched out design and we will then discuss how it would work in game, what he needs to roll to try and design and build it and how long/expensive it will be to make. I will then work with him to homebrew some rules/stats etc for it.
This for me is the better option rather then trying to use existing equipment and bend the rules, come up with a design that works, or ask the tinkerer in your party to do so, and then work with your DM to create the rules for that item.
My Artificer player has a vision in his head of a heavy crossbow/shield combination, I am waiting for his sketched out design and we will then discuss how it would work in game, what he needs to roll to try and design and build it and how long/expensive it will be to make. I will then work with him to homebrew some rules/stats etc for it.
This for me is the better option rather then trying to use existing equipment and bend the rules, come up with a design that works, or ask the tinkerer in your party to do so, and then work with your DM to create the rules for that item.
This isn't the best place to talk about homebrew... that forum is over here. For what it's worth, I think the best way to handle that for an Artificer is not to homebrew equipment, but to homebrew an infusion instead... +1 AC (in line with dual-wielder, defense fighting style, etc) to the infused weapon, and mutually-exclusive with the repeating shot infusion
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
My Artificer player has a vision in his head of a heavy crossbow/shield combination, I am waiting for his sketched out design and we will then discuss how it would work in game, what he needs to roll to try and design and build it and how long/expensive it will be to make. I will then work with him to homebrew some rules/stats etc for it.
This for me is the better option rather then trying to use existing equipment and bend the rules, come up with a design that works, or ask the tinkerer in your party to do so, and then work with your DM to create the rules for that item.
This isn't the best place to talk about homebrew... that forum is over here. For what it's worth, I think the best way to handle that for an Artificer is not to homebrew equipment, but to homebrew an infusion instead... +1 AC (in line with dual-wielder, defense fighting style, etc) to the infused weapon, and mutually-exclusive with the repeating shot infusion
I was trying to get to a solution to the original question as opposed to discussing the homebrew. The question was about using a bow/crossbow or shield, to my mind the rules state explicitly that no a person cannot wield both. However I then wanted to explain how I handle this in my own game (I actually found this question looking for the answer to that same question). I have told my player if their design solves the key issues as stated in this question, then we will discuss it as a viable piece of equipment.
I don’t however see the need to apply a magical solution to a feat of engineering, as a dm, of a player can come up with a solution to the stated problems with wielding a shield and crossbow, and these solutions are logical and or legal in regards to the rules, then the player should be rewarded for out of the box thinking.
I assume the player is thinking of something like this:
but with a big crossbow. If you don't want something like that to be "bending" the rules, you probably want to give it limitations, like a high weight (combine the weight of a shield and crossbow), the "heavy" property, maybe other drawbacks...
Law of Unintended Consequences. If you allow one player to break the core functionality of how equipment works, you're either going to have to allow it for everyone (and everything), or you'll end up with a very salty group of players. Allowing one player to have a single object that functions as both a Shieldand a Crossbow, Heavy is going to be followed by someone else saying "I have a Greatsword with an oversized hilt that acts as a Shield too" ... Bad Idea™
Allowing a player to apply a class-feature-based solution (which for Artificers is... magic) which emulates a comparable, balanced feature is a Good Idea™. The player gets a balanced version of the functionality they want (which would be +1 AC for "I want a little more armor without changing playstyle"), using their own class features to accomplish it, without opening floodgates or stepping on others' toes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
If a magical option already exists, DMs should be very careful about allowing a mundane version to emulate it.
The +2 bonus from a shield is comparable to the +2 bonus from half-cover. The Artificer could essentially achieve their goal by using Mold Earth to create a low wall to shoot over. (Stationary solution)
Law of Unintended Consequences. If you allow one player to break the core functionality of how equipment works, you're either going to have to allow it for everyone (and everything), or you'll end up with a very salty group of players. Allowing one player to have a single object that functions as both a Shieldand a Crossbow, Heavy is going to be followed by someone else saying "I have a Greatsword with an oversized hilt that acts as a Shield too" ... Bad Idea™
Allowing a player to apply a class-feature-based solution (which for Artificers is... magic) which emulates a comparable, balanced feature is a Good Idea™. The player gets a balanced version of the functionality they want (which would be +1 AC for "I want a little more armor without changing playstyle"), using their own class features to accomplish it, without opening floodgates or stepping on others' toes.
See I disagree here, but you seem to have missed a key part of my comment above, the player is going to show me his designs, and we will then discuss mechanics. So already I doubt it will be exactly a shield plus heavy crossbow, or there will be major negatives to using it, maybe the damage output will be reduced, or it will only offer ac+1, or it will take an action or bonus action to reload it. Or all the above. Until I see the players sketched out real life design I can’t make those decisions.
The player also needs to build it, which will require resources, tine and rolls. Now once built that item may actually go to another player, the artificer has already told me he has a list of things he wants to work with me on to try and build to support the party.
As to your, my great sword shield combo you seem to be assuming all players min max and try and break rules, instead of supporting a player who’s very existence is the building of things, in my world artificers are not just magical item creators, but also inventors. For instance I know somewhere there is a Leardo Devinicivo, an artificer who creates beautiful works of art, has created the sketches of a helicopter and makes magical items.
What is the point in living in a static works where characters can’t have new ideas of how to build things to solve a problem.
The crossbow expert feat allows you to ignore the loading property and the artificer repeating weapon infusion allows you to ignore the ammunition property. Simple answer is to combine the two, and hey presto.
But that's only at level 20 when you can infuse up to 12 items so there is hopefully room to share. Also, Artificers can always find stuff from other sources to attune to. Having more than one high level artificer in a group is probably a good way to mess up the game. :D
At level 20, the Artificer can only have SIX items Infused at once. They will know 12 possible Infusions to choose between, but, still: only six at once.
Importantly, also:
At 10th level, they gain the ability to Attune 4 items (rather than the usual 3) .... the exact same level when they gain their 4th active Infusion.
The same thing happens at level 14 - they gain a 5th active Infusion, and the ability to Attune a fifth item.
And at 18th, it happens yet again: they gain a sixth active Infusion, right alongside the ability to Attune a sixth item.
...
To me, that makes the intent pretty clear: those Infusions are generally meant for the Artificer's personal use, not sharing by default. If he does, then he's being especially generous. But you shouldn't expect it of him.
With the new shield feat from UA, you could fire any crossbow, then let go with one hand (in the case of a two-handed crossbow) and use your object interaction to grab your shield. This is still only a partial solution as the next round, you would need to use your object interaction to remove the shield, then you would have that free hand necessary for reloading and firing, but the end of the round would find you without your shield on.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Dropping an item is always a non-action.
So, round 2: drop shield, reload crossbow, [free item-interaction] pick shield back up.
You're right about the number of infusions, my bad.
That said, nothing stops to Artificer to share their infusions. Especially since they can gain the benefit from their 20th level spell from any attuned item, not just their own infused ones. So the number of infused items doesn't really, really matter until level 20. So the point still stands, there's no reason why an Artficer wouldn't be able to share their stuff. :)
I'm not saying they can't.
I'm saying, don't expect them to (where "expect" comes very close to "demand"). I think the class is balanced around the idea that the Artificer is infusing items for themselves, not as a sort of "whole party walking armory".
Except unequipping (doffing) the shield is a distinct use of 1 Action, just as reequipping it again (donning) is another distinct use of 1 Action. Shenanigans don't work here.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Sure, but not everyone plays with egoists who don't like to share the loot. :) Either way, in a discussion on what an Artificer *can* do it's a bit pointless to bring up as an argument what an Artificer's player *might* do. :)
... "egoists" ...? Insults now, really??
Especially: class abilities are not loot.
And that's what Infusions are - Artificer's class abilities.
SMDH
Relax, you are over-reacting. No-one is forcing you to share your Artificer's infusions if you don't want to. The point is that they can solve the problem presented (how to reload while also using a shield).
Also, people are free to play artificers any way they want. Some might want to keep their infusions to themselves, others might not. It's not any different than say, asking a cleric for a healing spell or a paladin to use lay on hands to cure a condition. But all that is way off topic so maybe we should leave it at that?
My Artificer player has a vision in his head of a heavy crossbow/shield combination, I am waiting for his sketched out design and we will then discuss how it would work in game, what he needs to roll to try and design and build it and how long/expensive it will be to make. I will then work with him to homebrew some rules/stats etc for it.
This for me is the better option rather then trying to use existing equipment and bend the rules, come up with a design that works, or ask the tinkerer in your party to do so, and then work with your DM to create the rules for that item.
This isn't the best place to talk about homebrew... that forum is over here. For what it's worth, I think the best way to handle that for an Artificer is not to homebrew equipment, but to homebrew an infusion instead... +1 AC (in line with dual-wielder, defense fighting style, etc) to the infused weapon, and mutually-exclusive with the repeating shot infusion
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I was trying to get to a solution to the original question as opposed to discussing the homebrew. The question was about using a bow/crossbow or shield, to my mind the rules state explicitly that no a person cannot wield both. However I then wanted to explain how I handle this in my own game (I actually found this question looking for the answer to that same question). I have told my player if their design solves the key issues as stated in this question, then we will discuss it as a viable piece of equipment.
I don’t however see the need to apply a magical solution to a feat of engineering, as a dm, of a player can come up with a solution to the stated problems with wielding a shield and crossbow, and these solutions are logical and or legal in regards to the rules, then the player should be rewarded for out of the box thinking.
I assume the player is thinking of something like this:
but with a big crossbow. If you don't want something like that to be "bending" the rules, you probably want to give it limitations, like a high weight (combine the weight of a shield and crossbow), the "heavy" property, maybe other drawbacks...
Law of Unintended Consequences. If you allow one player to break the core functionality of how equipment works, you're either going to have to allow it for everyone (and everything), or you'll end up with a very salty group of players. Allowing one player to have a single object that functions as both a Shield and a Crossbow, Heavy is going to be followed by someone else saying "I have a Greatsword with an oversized hilt that acts as a Shield too" ... Bad Idea™
Allowing a player to apply a class-feature-based solution (which for Artificers is... magic) which emulates a comparable, balanced feature is a Good Idea™. The player gets a balanced version of the functionality they want (which would be +1 AC for "I want a little more armor without changing playstyle"), using their own class features to accomplish it, without opening floodgates or stepping on others' toes.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
#Animated Shield
If a magical option already exists, DMs should be very careful about allowing a mundane version to emulate it.
The +2 bonus from a shield is comparable to the +2 bonus from half-cover. The Artificer could essentially achieve their goal by using Mold Earth to create a low wall to shoot over. (Stationary solution)
See I disagree here, but you seem to have missed a key part of my comment above, the player is going to show me his designs, and we will then discuss mechanics. So already I doubt it will be exactly a shield plus heavy crossbow, or there will be major negatives to using it, maybe the damage output will be reduced, or it will only offer ac+1, or it will take an action or bonus action to reload it. Or all the above. Until I see the players sketched out real life design I can’t make those decisions.
The player also needs to build it, which will require resources, tine and rolls. Now once built that item may actually go to another player, the artificer has already told me he has a list of things he wants to work with me on to try and build to support the party.
As to your, my great sword shield combo you seem to be assuming all players min max and try and break rules, instead of supporting a player who’s very existence is the building of things, in my world artificers are not just magical item creators, but also inventors. For instance I know somewhere there is a Leardo Devinicivo, an artificer who creates beautiful works of art, has created the sketches of a helicopter and makes magical items.
What is the point in living in a static works where characters can’t have new ideas of how to build things to solve a problem.
The crossbow expert feat allows you to ignore the loading property and the artificer repeating weapon infusion allows you to ignore the ammunition property. Simple answer is to combine the two, and hey presto.
Repeating Weapon ignores the loading property as well.
Preloading a hand crossbow is fine for the first shot one-handed, but you still run into the problem of reloading it in subsequent attacks.
"Not all those who wander are lost"