So super basic setup, playing a Kobold Artificer(Armorer) who just hit level 4. Have the stat priorities any artificer should want and then some(14/16/18/20/16/12, they're pretty damn high, I know, GMs call). More then likely gonna focus on Guardian mode. So with level 4 comes the ASI(which I rather obviously don't really need). So I'm looking at feats. Was giving Magic Initiate serious consideration until a Reddit thread pulled my attention to the fact this feat lacks the 'You can also cast these spells using spell slots' clause that several(or rather a couple) others do. Now my GM is fairly reasonable and may just give me that option but I haven't gotten the thumbs up and was curious how common a house ruling that is?
Now before I move on from the Artificer topic focus(sort of), when it comes to Infusions I want to make sure I'm doing it correctly, until level 9 the armor counts as a 'single item' correct? Something you can place any 1 Infusion into as long as it's applicable? I ask because up till now my 2 infusions have been Enhanced Defense on my Shield and either Enhance Weapon on the Armor/Gauntlet(s) or Replicate Magic Item[Bag of Holding](LSS: It's a party thing I just sort of accept). At level 6 I was eyeing the Boots of the Winding Path which would have to 'replace' the Enhanced Weapon due to the 'single item nature' of the armor correct?
I was then considering the power difference between Fey Teleportation and Fey Touched, neither of them are super heavy in flavor(which is normal but I always consideration character thematics, it's why I still lack Booming Blade) and the balancing seems very off. Read/Write/Speak a specific language somehow balances with the lose of a 1pt ASI option, an additional spell from one of 2 schools(with a free casting) and the ability to cast them with spell slots? Seems really odd to me(yes I know the books were printed like 4 years apart and 5E doesn't use the Errata as a Rules update model as much as previous editions but still seems like they could have been reprinted /w updates!) I really only bring this up to sort of 'backup' the request of my DM to allows the addition of the clause to Magic Initiate.
Now to change topics again what feats would yall recommend? Oher considerations I've been keeping in mind are Mobile(for Hit and Run Thunder Gauntlet antics, which will get that much better next level with Extra Attack), Heavy Armor Master(for that small but meaningful 'DR' since 95% of the damage we take is non magical in nature for now) and Chef(fluff reason and the 'small' healing/mitigation benefits). Down the road Fighting Initiate[TWF] is also on a short list(though by that point I may have enough other BA options I don't need to consider TWF). Another thought if Magic Initiate doesn't work out is Artificer Initiate just to pickup Booming Blade(or another cantrip) and 'hard set' Cure Wounds as a spell known to free up a 'prepared spell' for the future(assuming that's how it works now that I'm thinking about it...).
1) Not sure what update to Fey-Touched you're looking for, it's very strong. You can try showing your DM the UA/OneD&D version of Magic Initiate though, which does include the "you may use your spell slots" clause. Either way I would avoid a half-feat, since I assume the 20 is your Int and therefore maxed out already; I'd grab something like Lucky instead.
2) The armor is one cohesive suit (because it expands to cover your body.) Whether you can wear your other boots under it and keep them enchanted is going to be a DM call, but the intent seems to be that you lose the listed slots until the 9th-level ability that mentions them comes online.
3) Your gauntlets aren't light weapons so you'll need Dual Wielder if you plan to TWF them. (Even then, this requires your DM to be okay with the awkwardness of "wielding" something you're wearing on your hands as opposed to holding in them.)
Regarding 3, the feature does say "each of the armor's gauntlets counts as a simple melee weapon". Suggests they're intended to count as separate weapons, rather than a single unit. I suppose one could try and argue the fine points of "wielding", but the damage die are still in the one-handed weapon range so it's only marginally better than dual wielding any other d8 weapon.
2) The armor is one cohesive suit (because it expands to cover your body.) Whether you can wear your other boots under it and keep them enchanted is going to be a DM call, but the intent seems to be that you lose the listed slots until the 9th-level ability that mentions them comes online.
3) Your gauntlets aren't light weapons so you'll need Dual Wielder if you plan to TWF them. (Even then, this requires your DM to be okay with the awkwardness of "wielding" something you're wearing on your hands as opposed to holding in them.)
2) Yeah that was my thinking and I didn't want to split hairs over trying to wear/fit other boots under the armor as that seems somewhat exploitable and I'd rather just leave it be. Other points made here have also made it seem like as far as Guardian Mode goes it may be best to leave the Enhance Weapon Infusion sidelined for now, or maybe grant it to an ally.
3) Is this based just on the fact the weapon isn't described as 'Light' in the class feature? I wasn't sure if it would be normal for that consideration to be addressed like that so we simply used previous editions Gauntlet rules(specifically 3.5 as the SRD was one of the first sources I found) which do treat Gauntlets as Light Weapons. Again may never be an issue if other bonus actions prevail but it is a solid call out. 2 feats to get a 'balanced' extra swing seems a bit heavy but may be a route worth taking depending on how the campaign progresses.
Regarding 3, the feature does say "each of the armor's gauntlets counts as a simple melee weapon". Suggests they're intended to count as separate weapons, rather than a single unit. I suppose one could try and argue the fine points of "wielding", but the damage die are still in the one-handed weapon range so it's only marginally better than dual wielding any other d8 weapon.
Solid point, as I have apparently done a few times lately I complete overlooked that particular distinction, which may have just been overly influenced by how the level 9 feature is worded as simply calling it 'the armor's special weapon'. I've also never actually used the other as a weapon(tempted but never did) as I try to keep my AC consistent but it is something to keep in mind!
The reason why the Thunder Gauntlets can't be used in two weapon fighting (without the TWF feat) is because they're not "Light", a requirement by RAW. Whether it makes sense (I'd agreed that it doesn't make narrative sense) is beside the point - they don't meet the requirements. Perhaps your DM will be willing to houserule that you don't need the feat to TWF with them, but RAW says no. This is just a case where the rules don't jive with common sense.
Ace:
There are several reasons to want to use the thunder gauntlets despite a middling damage die:
- You can add Int instead of Str to the damage, which is a very nice boost for an Artificer - depending on your stats, somewhere in the region of a 30% boost to damage upon a hit (switching from a +2 Str to a +4 Int). That's the equivalent of switching your main weapon to a greataxe...while still getting the offhand attack.
- It imposes Disadvantage on opponents you hit if they target anyone else.
- It allows you to keep your hands free, if you ever need to do something else that requires free hands.
Yeah, if dual wielding the gauntlets were to be allowed by the DM, I'd definitely go for it. There's a reason why the gauntlets is part of the main features of the subclass.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I'm not saying there's no perks, but it doesn't break the game. You're still doing damage on the same scale as any other TWF build, actually a bit less since unless you dip or take a second feat you don't get the fighting style to add an ability mod to off hand damage. An extra shot at the rider ability is nice, but that's a simple bit of synergy that's fair for investing a feat in. Hands free doesn't really come up that much in 5e, and since all Artificer spells have an M component which is met by wearing the armor for an Armorer, Somatic components aren't a factor, assuming the table keeps track of that detail.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So super basic setup, playing a Kobold Artificer(Armorer) who just hit level 4. Have the stat priorities any artificer should want and then some(14/16/18/20/16/12, they're pretty damn high, I know, GMs call). More then likely gonna focus on Guardian mode. So with level 4 comes the ASI(which I rather obviously don't really need). So I'm looking at feats. Was giving Magic Initiate serious consideration until a Reddit thread pulled my attention to the fact this feat lacks the 'You can also cast these spells using spell slots' clause that several(or rather a couple) others do. Now my GM is fairly reasonable and may just give me that option but I haven't gotten the thumbs up and was curious how common a house ruling that is?
Now before I move on from the Artificer topic focus(sort of), when it comes to Infusions I want to make sure I'm doing it correctly, until level 9 the armor counts as a 'single item' correct? Something you can place any 1 Infusion into as long as it's applicable? I ask because up till now my 2 infusions have been Enhanced Defense on my Shield and either Enhance Weapon on the Armor/Gauntlet(s) or Replicate Magic Item[Bag of Holding](LSS: It's a party thing I just sort of accept). At level 6 I was eyeing the Boots of the Winding Path which would have to 'replace' the Enhanced Weapon due to the 'single item nature' of the armor correct?
I was then considering the power difference between Fey Teleportation and Fey Touched, neither of them are super heavy in flavor(which is normal but I always consideration character thematics, it's why I still lack Booming Blade) and the balancing seems very off. Read/Write/Speak a specific language somehow balances with the lose of a 1pt ASI option, an additional spell from one of 2 schools(with a free casting) and the ability to cast them with spell slots? Seems really odd to me(yes I know the books were printed like 4 years apart and 5E doesn't use the Errata as a Rules update model as much as previous editions but still seems like they could have been reprinted /w updates!) I really only bring this up to sort of 'backup' the request of my DM to allows the addition of the clause to Magic Initiate.
Now to change topics again what feats would yall recommend? Oher considerations I've been keeping in mind are Mobile(for Hit and Run Thunder Gauntlet antics, which will get that much better next level with Extra Attack), Heavy Armor Master(for that small but meaningful 'DR' since 95% of the damage we take is non magical in nature for now) and Chef(fluff reason and the 'small' healing/mitigation benefits). Down the road Fighting Initiate[TWF] is also on a short list(though by that point I may have enough other BA options I don't need to consider TWF). Another thought if Magic Initiate doesn't work out is Artificer Initiate just to pickup Booming Blade(or another cantrip) and 'hard set' Cure Wounds as a spell known to free up a 'prepared spell' for the future(assuming that's how it works now that I'm thinking about it...).
1) Not sure what update to Fey-Touched you're looking for, it's very strong. You can try showing your DM the UA/OneD&D version of Magic Initiate though, which does include the "you may use your spell slots" clause. Either way I would avoid a half-feat, since I assume the 20 is your Int and therefore maxed out already; I'd grab something like Lucky instead.
2) The armor is one cohesive suit (because it expands to cover your body.) Whether you can wear your other boots under it and keep them enchanted is going to be a DM call, but the intent seems to be that you lose the listed slots until the 9th-level ability that mentions them comes online.
3) Your gauntlets aren't light weapons so you'll need Dual Wielder if you plan to TWF them. (Even then, this requires your DM to be okay with the awkwardness of "wielding" something you're wearing on your hands as opposed to holding in them.)
Regarding 3, the feature does say "each of the armor's gauntlets counts as a simple melee weapon". Suggests they're intended to count as separate weapons, rather than a single unit. I suppose one could try and argue the fine points of "wielding", but the damage die are still in the one-handed weapon range so it's only marginally better than dual wielding any other d8 weapon.
2) Yeah that was my thinking and I didn't want to split hairs over trying to wear/fit other boots under the armor as that seems somewhat exploitable and I'd rather just leave it be. Other points made here have also made it seem like as far as Guardian Mode goes it may be best to leave the Enhance Weapon Infusion sidelined for now, or maybe grant it to an ally.
3) Is this based just on the fact the weapon isn't described as 'Light' in the class feature? I wasn't sure if it would be normal for that consideration to be addressed like that so we simply used previous editions Gauntlet rules(specifically 3.5 as the SRD was one of the first sources I found) which do treat Gauntlets as Light Weapons. Again may never be an issue if other bonus actions prevail but it is a solid call out. 2 feats to get a 'balanced' extra swing seems a bit heavy but may be a route worth taking depending on how the campaign progresses.
Solid point, as I have apparently done a few times lately I complete overlooked that particular distinction, which may have just been overly influenced by how the level 9 feature is worded as simply calling it 'the armor's special weapon'. I've also never actually used the other as a weapon(tempted but never did) as I try to keep my AC consistent but it is something to keep in mind!
ShanxAlot:
The reason why the Thunder Gauntlets can't be used in two weapon fighting (without the TWF feat) is because they're not "Light", a requirement by RAW. Whether it makes sense (I'd agreed that it doesn't make narrative sense) is beside the point - they don't meet the requirements. Perhaps your DM will be willing to houserule that you don't need the feat to TWF with them, but RAW says no. This is just a case where the rules don't jive with common sense.
Ace:
There are several reasons to want to use the thunder gauntlets despite a middling damage die:
- You can add Int instead of Str to the damage, which is a very nice boost for an Artificer - depending on your stats, somewhere in the region of a 30% boost to damage upon a hit (switching from a +2 Str to a +4 Int). That's the equivalent of switching your main weapon to a greataxe...while still getting the offhand attack.
- It imposes Disadvantage on opponents you hit if they target anyone else.
- It allows you to keep your hands free, if you ever need to do something else that requires free hands.
Yeah, if dual wielding the gauntlets were to be allowed by the DM, I'd definitely go for it. There's a reason why the gauntlets is part of the main features of the subclass.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I'm not saying there's no perks, but it doesn't break the game. You're still doing damage on the same scale as any other TWF build, actually a bit less since unless you dip or take a second feat you don't get the fighting style to add an ability mod to off hand damage. An extra shot at the rider ability is nice, but that's a simple bit of synergy that's fair for investing a feat in. Hands free doesn't really come up that much in 5e, and since all Artificer spells have an M component which is met by wearing the armor for an Armorer, Somatic components aren't a factor, assuming the table keeps track of that detail.