The way I see it, the Unearthed Arcana is all about letting WotC know if they're going in a good direction with their ideas or not. The previous version of the Artificer was a mess, and this version, while it is an improvement, still has flaws that need to be addressed, and that's why most of us are here: to take a look at what WotC is thinking, give them our feedback on what's good and what needs to see change, and that way we get a better product in the next book that content comes out in.
EDIT: And as for anyone who comes to the UA just for free content...well, they can do that, but more often than not they're going to be sorely disappointed if they think this stuff is ready to be played...
Good point, never researched the actual book release schedule so didn’t see the speed up last year. Happy to concede that point, and understand but lament that there isn’t a focus on UA as a pillar of release schedule, as it gets some hate and not lots of money.
yet you act as if UA was very vital, its not ! all i see from your point of view here, is that you just want new content faster.
@mezzurah said it right, unearthed arcana doesn't even matter much. yes our feedback is important to them, but its never gonna be more important then them real job ! which is to make more books and stories. i feel like those who come here for unearthed arcana more often then not just want more content, don't care about feedback or anything, and to give themselves good conscience, actually give feedback. thats how i feel when i read "they should bring it more often" feels to me like those MMORPG guilds who plays only on the PTR servers only because they get the new content faster so they can breeze thru it faster. and then when they get the new content they are like "bah, already gone thru it, i want new stuff already."
to me its quite simple... we already have the chance of giving our feedback on something. thats already much better then not doing it at all. all i'm saying.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
@DnDPaladin, I never said it doesn't matter much; as a matter of fact I think it's quite important. Now, I don't expect WotC to drop everything and bend over backwards to put out a new UA (though I would appreciate if they could give a loose estimate on when they think it might be ready) but I think without it we very well might have had some fairly terrible playtest content made official, like the first iteration of the Artificer, or that terrible Mystic class that you banned from your table.
@mezzurah this section of your text might means different things to me then it is to yours then. to me this...
The way I see it, the Unearthed Arcana is all about letting WotC know if they're going in a good direction with their ideas or not.
means that our view is important only for them to know what kind of stuff we want. to a company while that is important per say, it is far from being the actual job or worth. as that is the easy job. hence its important enough to do it, but not important enough to dedicate a whole department to it. thats what i meant to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
So my DM in yesterday’s session made an interesting decision against himself regarding my Alchemist ‘19. So we were trading blows with a creature with the Silence spell, which it cast as soon as it could after seeing one of us cast something. When it got to my turn, after three other casters in my party each found out they couldn’t cast anything, he stopped in realisation and whipped out the UA:A19 document and had a read. He then ruled that I COULD in fact use my ‘spells’ on the basis that I’m not casting a spell but using the items that the class descriptor states regarding how they cast magic. I even argued against it, seeming OP to be able to ‘cast’ in a Silence bubble, but ultimately he made good points, making good point as ‘you’re not going to build in a password for an ointment to work!’ and other things like it.
Whats your take on it? Sticking to the descriptions, particularly in The Magic of Artifice on page 4, can Artificers cast during a magical Silence? If not, it’s something worth noting in feedback as to not abuse it later. Imagine the current iteration of Artillerist somehow getting silence on themselves and then going on a fireborn damage undetected by guards in the next room.
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired) Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
@DnDPaladin I think this is all a matter of miscommunication; I understand that English is not your first language, and the Internet is a difficult place to read people's intentions, so I think we can all chalk it up and agree that ultimately what everyone wants is to help WotC put out the best content that it can. We should all also probably let this be the end of this particular conversation, as it is derailing the thread a little.
@Spikepit I personally would rule the same way that you were thinking, as I seem to remember the folks at WotC saying their intention was to have the Artificer's spellcasting be subject to most of the same rules as the other classes. That said, it would be a good idea to bring it up in the survey when it does come out, and mention that it did cause some confusion at your table.
I think the intent is kind of like historical Alchemists/Witches who often made a spectacle even if using real medicines, saying they had to speak the special incantation to release the power. Even if you think on real life medicine rarely works instantly, however you flavour it the verbal spells should still be verbal to release the effect instantly.
I think of it as the salves you're creating are a blank template that are bestowed with magic upon adding the finishing ingredients (the spell components). I think it's very much meant to be more of a flavor of spellcasting more than a mechanic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Well... Since when is throwing a vial casting a spell ?
Thats how i see it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
As part of casting the spell, you draw a vial of clear liquid from your Alchemy Supplies. As you focus on the vial the liquid changed color (your choice, but I'd make it that color for that spell from now on), then you either throw the contents of the vial or drink it. All part of the spell casting action. The spell take affect normally as per the spell description.
When I cast Cure Wounds using my Tinker Tools, I am wearing a joy buzzer. :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Watch your back, conserve your ammo, and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
No clue on when it's coming; I'm fine with the wait, I just wish they could give a bit of an ETA. As far as subclasses go, I would really like to see a Wandslinger subclass since they are using the Eberron setting for inspiration (and also because the section on wandslingers in the Eberron sourcebook is extremely lackluster).
Also, a question for everyone: since Arcane Armament has been mentioned as being likely to be moved out as a main class feature, what would folks think about it becoming an Infusion instead of a subclass feature? I realize that may be a bit similar to the Thirsting Blade invocation for Warlocks (and could be more op than I'm considering) but I've been thinking that might be a cool way to implement it.
Your Wandslinger would more than likely be the Artillerist, as it's subclass feature "Tools of the Trade - Crafting" gives a bonus to crafting wands and subclass feature "Wand Prototype" deals with wands and it gets a upgrade at level 14.
So my DM in yesterday’s session made an interesting decision against himself regarding my Alchemist ‘19. So we were trading blows with a creature with the Silence spell, which it cast as soon as it could after seeing one of us cast something. When it got to my turn, after three other casters in my party each found out they couldn’t cast anything, he stopped in realisation and whipped out the UA:A19 document and had a read. He then ruled that I COULD in fact use my ‘spells’ on the basis that I’m not casting a spell but using the items that the class descriptor states regarding how they cast magic. I even argued against it, seeming OP to be able to ‘cast’ in a Silence bubble, but ultimately he made good points, making good point as ‘you’re not going to build in a password for an ointment to work!’ and other things like it.
Whats your take on it? Sticking to the descriptions, particularly in The Magic of Artifice on page 4, can Artificers cast during a magical Silence? If not, it’s something worth noting in feedback as to not abuse it later. Imagine the current iteration of Artillerist somehow getting silence on themselves and then going on a fireborn damage undetected by guards in the next room.
The way the Artificer '19 UA is worded, you are required to use a tool kit you are proficient with as an arcane focus for your spells.
"Tools Required - 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."
The feature states nothing about an invention (that would be flavor). You can also use an "Infused Item" as a spellcasting focus starting at 2nd level. In the case of the Alchemist subclass, you gain a bonus when you use your alchemist's supplies as your spellcasting focus (but that bonus is limited to restoring hit points, or damage rolls for acid or poison damage). Again, it states nothing about using an item you created to cast the spells (that would be flavor).
So, in this case of the Silence spell having a negative affect on you as well, you would correct and your DM would be in the wrong. People are mistaking flavor for rules. Now, these rules are not set in stone. None of the rules for D&D are set in stone. A DM can have their own rules, like taking a potion doesn't require an action but a bonus action. But, feeding a healing potion to down (but not dead) teammate requires an action.
Nothing in the Artificer '19 UA says that a player has to have some sort of contraption or invention to cast a spell. In fact, the UA "SPECIFICALLY" states that spells must be cast through Thieves' Tool, Artisan's Tool, or an Infused Item. But, as I stated earlier rules for D&D are not set in stone.
So my DM in yesterday’s session made an interesting decision against himself regarding my Alchemist ‘19. So we were trading blows with a creature with the Silence spell, which it cast as soon as it could after seeing one of us cast something. When it got to my turn, after three other casters in my party each found out they couldn’t cast anything, he stopped in realisation and whipped out the UA:A19 document and had a read. He then ruled that I COULD in fact use my ‘spells’ on the basis that I’m not casting a spell but using the items that the class descriptor states regarding how they cast magic. I even argued against it, seeming OP to be able to ‘cast’ in a Silence bubble, but ultimately he made good points, making good point as ‘you’re not going to build in a password for an ointment to work!’ and other things like it.
Whats your take on it? Sticking to the descriptions, particularly in The Magic of Artifice on page 4, can Artificers cast during a magical Silence? If not, it’s something worth noting in feedback as to not abuse it later. Imagine the current iteration of Artillerist somehow getting silence on themselves and then going on a fireborn damage undetected by guards in the next room.
The way the Artificer '19 UA is worded, you are required to use a tool kit you are proficient with as an arcane focus for your spells.
"Tools Required - 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."
The feature states nothing about an invention (that would be flavor). You can also use an "Infused Item" as a spellcasting focus starting at 2nd level. In the case of the Alchemist subclass, you gain a bonus when you use your alchemist's supplies as your spellcasting focus (but that bonus is limited to restoring hit points, or damage rolls for acid or poison damage). Again, it states nothing about using an item you created to cast the spells (that would be flavor).
So, in this case of the Silence spell having a negative affect on you as well, you would correct and your DM would be in the wrong. People are mistaking flavor for rules. Now, these rules are not set in stone. None of the rules for D&D are set in stone. A DM can have their own rules, like taking a potion doesn't require an action but a bonus action. But, feeding a healing potion to down (but not dead) teammate requires an action.
Nothing in the Artificer '19 UA says that a player has to have some sort of contraption or invention to cast a spell. In fact, the UA "SPECIFICALLY" states that spells must be cast through Thieves' Tool, Artisan's Tool, or an Infused Item. But, as I stated earlier rules for D&D are not set in stone.
From page four of the UA:A19 document:
The Magic of Artifice As an artificer, you use tools when you cast your spells. When describing your spellcasting, think about how you’re using a tool to perform the spell effect. If you cast cure wounds using alchemist’s supplies, you could be quickly producing a salve. If you cast it using tinker’s tools, you might have a miniature mechanical spider that binds wounds. When you cast poison spray, you could fling foul chemicals or use a wand that spits venom. The effect of the spell is the same as for a spellcaster of any other class, but your method of spellcasting is special. The same principle applies when you prepare your spells. As an artificer, you don’t study a spellbook or pray to prepare your spells. Instead, you work with your tools and create the specialized items you’ll use to produce your effects. If you replace cure wounds with shocking grasp, you might be breaking down the device you used to heal and creating an offensive item in its place—perhaps a gauntlet that lets you channel a surge of energy.
This is where he got it from. The fact that it still says ‘cast ... using tools’ is where I was coming from. Even though ‘the spell’ is Replace by a gadget, I’d still have to turn it on with magic or something.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired) Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
No clue on when it's coming; I'm fine with the wait, I just wish they could give a bit of an ETA. As far as subclasses go, I would really like to see a Wandslinger subclass since they are using the Eberron setting for inspiration (and also because the section on wandslingers in the Eberron sourcebook is extremely lackluster).
Also, a question for everyone: since Arcane Armament has been mentioned as being likely to be moved out as a main class feature, what would folks think about it becoming an Infusion instead of a subclass feature? I realize that may be a bit similar to the Thirsting Blade invocation for Warlocks (and could be more op than I'm considering) but I've been thinking that might be a cool way to implement it.
Your Wandslinger would more than likely be the Artillerist, as it's subclass feature "Tools of the Trade - Crafting" gives a bonus to crafting wands and subclass feature "Wand Prototype" deals with wands and it gets a upgrade at level 14.
Perhaps, but I really hope that's not the case because the wandcrafting elements of the Artillerist seem to me like they're really out of place and would be better suited in a subclass that specialized in arcane foci...
EDIT: I would really much prefer that the Artillerist's subclass features revolve more around the use of their turret since that seems to be the strongest element of the subclass and have the level 6 Wand Prototype be replaced with something else, like being able to cast your spells through your turret rather than just your own position.
The problem in the text of artificer. It is contradictory. It says that you cast normally thus involving VSM. But then it says you fluff it it as just giving a vial full of healing. Preparing such a vial might use the vsm method but definitely drinking it wouldnt make sense to use said vsm.
I can understand your dm. It make no sense for immersion to require vsm just for drinking something.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
So my DM in yesterday’s session made an interesting decision against himself regarding my Alchemist ‘19. So we were trading blows with a creature with the Silence spell, which it cast as soon as it could after seeing one of us cast something. When it got to my turn, after three other casters in my party each found out they couldn’t cast anything, he stopped in realisation and whipped out the UA:A19 document and had a read. He then ruled that I COULD in fact use my ‘spells’ on the basis that I’m not casting a spell but using the items that the class descriptor states regarding how they cast magic. I even argued against it, seeming OP to be able to ‘cast’ in a Silence bubble, but ultimately he made good points, making good point as ‘you’re not going to build in a password for an ointment to work!’ and other things like it.
Whats your take on it? Sticking to the descriptions, particularly in The Magic of Artifice on page 4, can Artificers cast during a magical Silence? If not, it’s something worth noting in feedback as to not abuse it later. Imagine the current iteration of Artillerist somehow getting silence on themselves and then going on a fireborn damage undetected by guards in the next room.
The way the Artificer '19 UA is worded, you are required to use a tool kit you are proficient with as an arcane focus for your spells.
"Tools Required - 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."
The feature states nothing about an invention (that would be flavor). You can also use an "Infused Item" as a spellcasting focus starting at 2nd level. In the case of the Alchemist subclass, you gain a bonus when you use your alchemist's supplies as your spellcasting focus (but that bonus is limited to restoring hit points, or damage rolls for acid or poison damage). Again, it states nothing about using an item you created to cast the spells (that would be flavor).
So, in this case of the Silence spell having a negative affect on you as well, you would correct and your DM would be in the wrong. People are mistaking flavor for rules. Now, these rules are not set in stone. None of the rules for D&D are set in stone. A DM can have their own rules, like taking a potion doesn't require an action but a bonus action. But, feeding a healing potion to down (but not dead) teammate requires an action.
Nothing in the Artificer '19 UA says that a player has to have some sort of contraption or invention to cast a spell. In fact, the UA "SPECIFICALLY" states that spells must be cast through Thieves' Tool, Artisan's Tool, or an Infused Item. But, as I stated earlier rules for D&D are not set in stone.
From page four of the UA:A19 document:
The Magic of Artifice As an artificer, you use tools when you cast your spells. When describing your spellcasting, think about how you’re using a tool to perform the spell effect. If you cast cure wounds using alchemist’s supplies, you could be quickly producing a salve. If you cast it using tinker’s tools, you might have a miniature mechanical spider that binds wounds. When you cast poison spray, you could fling foul chemicals or use a wand that spits venom. The effect of the spell is the same as for a spellcaster of any other class, but your method of spellcasting is special. The same principle applies when you prepare your spells. As an artificer, you don’t study a spellbook or pray to prepare your spells. Instead, you work with your tools and create the specialized items you’ll use to produce your effects. If you replace cure wounds with shocking grasp, you might be breaking down the device you used to heal and creating an offensive item in its place—perhaps a gauntlet that lets you channel a surge of energy.
This is where he got it from. The fact that it still says ‘cast ... using tools’ is where I was coming from. Even though ‘the spell’ is Replace by a gadget, I’d still have to turn it on with magic or something.
You forgot the last portion of "The Magic of Artifice" gray box
"Such details don’t limit you in any way or provide you with any benefit. You don’t have to justify how you’re using tools to cast a spell. But describing your spellcasting creatively is a fun way to distinguish yourself from other spellcasters."
Those three sentences clearly define the spellcasting of the Artificer. Using a contraption, gadget, invention, liquid, salve, or whatever when you cast a spell, does not mean that you are free from the spell's component requirements. That is what I am trying to point out. You were correct with your assessment of the Artificer not being able to cast spells with a verbal component if you are in an area with a Silence spell cast on it.
The Magic of Artifice gray box is essentially telling you to be creative and use flair when you cast a spell. While at the same time telling you that you don't have to. However, as I stated in my response to your original post, the DM can chose to use or not use any rule they want and they can use homebrew rules.
I agree that the ability to craft wands and the subclass feature Wand Prototype are out of place with the Artillerist. It just doesn't seem to fit the subclass. Personally, I would be fine if they remove anything that has to do with wands for the Artillerist. Then they could expand the number and types of turrets that are available, and allow you to chose a 3 turret plans at 3rd level and an additional turret plan at 6th, 9th, 14th and 17th levels. Doing this and keeping the subclass feature Fortified Position I feel would give the Artillerist the right feel and give the players additional turret options.
The problem in the text of artificer. It is contradictory. It says that you cast normally thus involving VSM. But then it says you fluff it it as just giving a vial full of healing. Preparing such a vial might use the vsm method but definitely drinking it wouldnt make sense to use said vsm.
I can understand your dm. It make no sense for immersion to require vsm just for drinking something.
I agree with everything that you said. The problem I feel is that they are trying to expand on the Artificer's spellcasting and requiring you to use a specific tool as an arcane focus in order to cast those spells. While at the same time telling you to use your imagination in describing how you cast those spells. You will still need to use VSM when you cast a spell, but saying you are creating a potion as you are describing your spellcasting doesn't work as the target of the spell can't drink the potion (in the middle of combat) as part of the casting.
The problem in the text of artificer. It is contradictory. It says that you cast normally thus involving VSM. But then it says you fluff it it as just giving a vial full of healing. Preparing such a vial might use the vsm method but definitely drinking it wouldnt make sense to use said vsm.
I can understand your dm. It make no sense for immersion to require vsm just for drinking something.
I agree with everything that you said. The problem I feel is that they are trying to expand on the Artificer's spellcasting and requiring you to use a specific tool as an arcane focus in order to cast those spells. While at the same time telling you to use your imagination in describing how you cast those spells. You will still need to use VSM when you cast a spell, but saying you are creating a potion as you are describing your spellcasting doesn't work as the target of the spell can't drink the potion (in the middle of combat) as part of the casting.
but is it actually a problem? it simply requires you to think more about how you "cast" a spell lets take something like cure wounds (Components V, S) and assume we are using say... alchemy supplies. *you quickly add several key ingredients to a vial and begin to chant a prayer of healing; as your hand circles the vial each rotation causes the content inside swirl and churn (mixing the ingredients). then as it reaches a critical and unstable state you splash the vials contents onto your target; but before it even touches him its unstable nature turns it into a red mist that that envelopes him quickly closing some of his woulds before dissipating. * here we have a perfectly logical example of how to cast healing without needing to assume you would drink it alternatively the mist could be inhaled as a form of "drinking". and doing so in this fashion still accounts for things like counter spell as you are using magic to get it into this unique state. i simply wished to add another perspective to this this is very much a class for the imaginative and its unique abilities will need unique answers.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The way I see it, the Unearthed Arcana is all about letting WotC know if they're going in a good direction with their ideas or not. The previous version of the Artificer was a mess, and this version, while it is an improvement, still has flaws that need to be addressed, and that's why most of us are here: to take a look at what WotC is thinking, give them our feedback on what's good and what needs to see change, and that way we get a better product in the next book that content comes out in.
EDIT: And as for anyone who comes to the UA just for free content...well, they can do that, but more often than not they're going to be sorely disappointed if they think this stuff is ready to be played...
yet you act as if UA was very vital, its not ! all i see from your point of view here, is that you just want new content faster.
@mezzurah said it right, unearthed arcana doesn't even matter much. yes our feedback is important to them, but its never gonna be more important then them real job !
which is to make more books and stories. i feel like those who come here for unearthed arcana more often then not just want more content, don't care about feedback or anything, and to give themselves good conscience, actually give feedback. thats how i feel when i read "they should bring it more often" feels to me like those MMORPG guilds who plays only on the PTR servers only because they get the new content faster so they can breeze thru it faster. and then when they get the new content they are like "bah, already gone thru it, i want new stuff already."
to me its quite simple... we already have the chance of giving our feedback on something. thats already much better then not doing it at all. all i'm saying.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
@DnDPaladin, I never said it doesn't matter much; as a matter of fact I think it's quite important. Now, I don't expect WotC to drop everything and bend over backwards to put out a new UA (though I would appreciate if they could give a loose estimate on when they think it might be ready) but I think without it we very well might have had some fairly terrible playtest content made official, like the first iteration of the Artificer, or that terrible Mystic class that you banned from your table.
@mezzurah this section of your text might means different things to me then it is to yours then. to me this...
means that our view is important only for them to know what kind of stuff we want. to a company while that is important per say, it is far from being the actual job or worth. as that is the easy job. hence its important enough to do it, but not important enough to dedicate a whole department to it. thats what i meant to me.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
So my DM in yesterday’s session made an interesting decision against himself regarding my Alchemist ‘19. So we were trading blows with a creature with the Silence spell, which it cast as soon as it could after seeing one of us cast something. When it got to my turn, after three other casters in my party each found out they couldn’t cast anything, he stopped in realisation and whipped out the UA:A19 document and had a read. He then ruled that I COULD in fact use my ‘spells’ on the basis that I’m not casting a spell but using the items that the class descriptor states regarding how they cast magic. I even argued against it, seeming OP to be able to ‘cast’ in a Silence bubble, but ultimately he made good points, making good point as ‘you’re not going to build in a password for an ointment to work!’ and other things like it.
Whats your take on it? Sticking to the descriptions, particularly in The Magic of Artifice on page 4, can Artificers cast during a magical Silence? If not, it’s something worth noting in feedback as to not abuse it later. Imagine the current iteration of Artillerist somehow getting silence on themselves and then going on a fireborn damage undetected by guards in the next room.
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired)
Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer
Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden
DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
@DnDPaladin I think this is all a matter of miscommunication; I understand that English is not your first language, and the Internet is a difficult place to read people's intentions, so I think we can all chalk it up and agree that ultimately what everyone wants is to help WotC put out the best content that it can. We should all also probably let this be the end of this particular conversation, as it is derailing the thread a little.
@Spikepit I personally would rule the same way that you were thinking, as I seem to remember the folks at WotC saying their intention was to have the Artificer's spellcasting be subject to most of the same rules as the other classes. That said, it would be a good idea to bring it up in the survey when it does come out, and mention that it did cause some confusion at your table.
I think the intent is kind of like historical Alchemists/Witches who often made a spectacle even if using real medicines, saying they had to speak the special incantation to release the power. Even if you think on real life medicine rarely works instantly, however you flavour it the verbal spells should still be verbal to release the effect instantly.
I think of it as the salves you're creating are a blank template that are bestowed with magic upon adding the finishing ingredients (the spell components). I think it's very much meant to be more of a flavor of spellcasting more than a mechanic.
Feature Requests || Homebrew FAQ || Pricing FAQ || Hardcovers FAQ || Snippet Codes || Tooltips
DDB Guides & FAQs, Class Guides, Character Builds, Game Guides, Useful Websites, and WOTC Resources
Well... Since when is throwing a vial casting a spell ?
Thats how i see it.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Really, I'm not sure of anything. But if character throws a viial does she use spell modifier or ranged weapons? That would determine if it's a spell?
As part of casting the spell, you draw a vial of clear liquid from your Alchemy Supplies. As you focus on the vial the liquid changed color (your choice, but I'd make it that color for that spell from now on), then you either throw the contents of the vial or drink it. All part of the spell casting action. The spell take affect normally as per the spell description.
When I cast Cure Wounds using my Tinker Tools, I am wearing a joy buzzer. :)
Watch your back, conserve your ammo,
and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
Your Wandslinger would more than likely be the Artillerist, as it's subclass feature "Tools of the Trade - Crafting" gives a bonus to crafting wands and subclass feature "Wand Prototype" deals with wands and it gets a upgrade at level 14.
The way the Artificer '19 UA is worded, you are required to use a tool kit you are proficient with as an arcane focus for your spells.
"Tools Required - 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."
The feature states nothing about an invention (that would be flavor). You can also use an "Infused Item" as a spellcasting focus starting at 2nd level. In the case of the Alchemist subclass, you gain a bonus when you use your alchemist's supplies as your spellcasting focus (but that bonus is limited to restoring hit points, or damage rolls for acid or poison damage). Again, it states nothing about using an item you created to cast the spells (that would be flavor).
So, in this case of the Silence spell having a negative affect on you as well, you would correct and your DM would be in the wrong. People are mistaking flavor for rules. Now, these rules are not set in stone. None of the rules for D&D are set in stone. A DM can have their own rules, like taking a potion doesn't require an action but a bonus action. But, feeding a healing potion to down (but not dead) teammate requires an action.
Nothing in the Artificer '19 UA says that a player has to have some sort of contraption or invention to cast a spell. In fact, the UA "SPECIFICALLY" states that spells must be cast through Thieves' Tool, Artisan's Tool, or an Infused Item. But, as I stated earlier rules for D&D are not set in stone.
From page four of the UA:A19 document:
The Magic of Artifice
As an artificer, you use tools when you cast your spells. When describing your spellcasting, think about how you’re using a tool to perform the spell effect. If you cast cure wounds using alchemist’s supplies, you could be quickly producing a salve. If you cast it using tinker’s tools, you might have a miniature mechanical spider that binds wounds. When you cast poison spray, you could fling foul chemicals or use a wand that spits venom. The effect of the spell is the same as for a spellcaster of any other class, but your method of spellcasting is special.
The same principle applies when you prepare your spells. As an artificer, you don’t study a spellbook or pray to prepare your spells. Instead, you work with your tools and create the specialized items you’ll use to produce your effects. If you replace cure wounds with shocking grasp, you might be breaking down the device you used to heal and creating an offensive item in its place—perhaps a gauntlet that lets you channel a surge of energy.
This is where he got it from. The fact that it still says ‘cast ... using tools’ is where I was coming from. Even though ‘the spell’ is Replace by a gadget, I’d still have to turn it on with magic or something.
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired)
Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer
Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden
DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
Perhaps, but I really hope that's not the case because the wandcrafting elements of the Artillerist seem to me like they're really out of place and would be better suited in a subclass that specialized in arcane foci...
EDIT: I would really much prefer that the Artillerist's subclass features revolve more around the use of their turret since that seems to be the strongest element of the subclass and have the level 6 Wand Prototype be replaced with something else, like being able to cast your spells through your turret rather than just your own position.
The problem in the text of artificer. It is contradictory. It says that you cast normally thus involving VSM. But then it says you fluff it it as just giving a vial full of healing. Preparing such a vial might use the vsm method but definitely drinking it wouldnt make sense to use said vsm.
I can understand your dm. It make no sense for immersion to require vsm just for drinking something.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
You forgot the last portion of "The Magic of Artifice" gray box
"Such details don’t limit you in any way or provide you with any benefit. You don’t have to justify how you’re using tools to cast a spell. But describing your spellcasting creatively is a fun way to distinguish yourself from other spellcasters."
Those three sentences clearly define the spellcasting of the Artificer. Using a contraption, gadget, invention, liquid, salve, or whatever when you cast a spell, does not mean that you are free from the spell's component requirements. That is what I am trying to point out. You were correct with your assessment of the Artificer not being able to cast spells with a verbal component if you are in an area with a Silence spell cast on it.
The Magic of Artifice gray box is essentially telling you to be creative and use flair when you cast a spell. While at the same time telling you that you don't have to. However, as I stated in my response to your original post, the DM can chose to use or not use any rule they want and they can use homebrew rules.
@Mezzurah
I agree that the ability to craft wands and the subclass feature Wand Prototype are out of place with the Artillerist. It just doesn't seem to fit the subclass. Personally, I would be fine if they remove anything that has to do with wands for the Artillerist. Then they could expand the number and types of turrets that are available, and allow you to chose a 3 turret plans at 3rd level and an additional turret plan at 6th, 9th, 14th and 17th levels. Doing this and keeping the subclass feature Fortified Position I feel would give the Artillerist the right feel and give the players additional turret options.
I agree with everything that you said. The problem I feel is that they are trying to expand on the Artificer's spellcasting and requiring you to use a specific tool as an arcane focus in order to cast those spells. While at the same time telling you to use your imagination in describing how you cast those spells. You will still need to use VSM when you cast a spell, but saying you are creating a potion as you are describing your spellcasting doesn't work as the target of the spell can't drink the potion (in the middle of combat) as part of the casting.
but is it actually a problem? it simply requires you to think more about how you "cast" a spell lets take something like cure wounds (Components V, S) and assume we are using say... alchemy supplies. *you quickly add several key ingredients to a vial and begin to chant a prayer of healing; as your hand circles the vial each rotation causes the content inside swirl and churn (mixing the ingredients). then as it reaches a critical and unstable state you splash the vials contents onto your target; but before it even touches him its unstable nature turns it into a red mist that that envelopes him quickly closing some of his woulds before dissipating. * here we have a perfectly logical example of how to cast healing without needing to assume you would drink it alternatively the mist could be inhaled as a form of "drinking". and doing so in this fashion still accounts for things like counter spell as you are using magic to get it into this unique state. i simply wished to add another perspective to this this is very much a class for the imaginative and its unique abilities will need unique answers.