I'm fry, and I make doodles. That's why they call me FRY DOODLES. Also no pressure but check out my YouTube channel (Fry Doodles) Soli Deo Gloria(Sed servus eius crustulum vult) I'm a disabled, neurodivergent, artsy dumpster fire, and somewhat of a clown. But, I'm also god's favorite princess and the most interesting girl in the world. Crafter of Constellations, vocaloid enjoyer, waluigi’s #1 fan, space alien, your favorite pretty boy, and certified silly goose
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
As I wrote in my previous post, an artificer doesn’t need an actual magic item to replicate one. For example, they wouldn’t use Replicate Magic Item on a wand of secrets to replicate another one as an infusion, they can “replicate” anything on the list whether they’ve ever encountered one for real or not. All they need is to know that Infusion, to have an Infusion slot available, and any nonmagical wand and they can make that thing.
Point of clarification: you can't replicate anything on the list. Learning the infusion only teaches you one item. You can learn the infusion multiple times, though, and pick a different item each time.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
As I wrote in my previous post, an artificer doesn’t need an actual magic item to replicate one. For example, they wouldn’t use Replicate Magic Item on a wand of secrets to replicate another one as an infusion, they can “replicate” anything on the list whether they’ve ever encountered one for real or not. All they need is to know that Infusion, to have an Infusion slot available, and any nonmagical wand and they can make that thing.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
Heh - now I am confused too.
Couldn't he just pick up a stick and say, "Look a Wand of Secrets!" (if the item was just going to be fake? There'd be nothing he'd need to roll as an Artificer - if he's not technically infusing an item?) I mean, other than a Persuasion Check or Deception Check for people to believe it's a Wand of Secrets?
He way buying it not fooling people that’s it’s real and he wanted to replicate the item that’s a fake.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
Heh - now I am confused too.
Couldn't he just pick up a stick and say, "Look a Wand of Secrets!" (if the item was just going to be fake? There'd be nothing he'd need to roll as an Artificer - if he's not technically infusing an item?) I mean, other than a Persuasion Check or Deception Check for people to believe it's a Wand of Secrets?
He way buying it not fooling people that’s it’s real and he wanted to replicate the item that’s a fake.
What?
It's hard to tell, but I think both you and the player completely misunderstand how Replicate Magic Item works. Maybe you should both read the Infuse Item and Replicate Magic Item bits of Artificer.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
As I wrote in my previous post, an artificer doesn’t need an actual magic item to replicate one. For example, they wouldn’t use Replicate Magic Item on a wand of secrets to replicate another one as an infusion, they can “replicate” anything on the list whether they’ve ever encountered one for real or not. All they need is to know that Infusion, to have an Infusion slot available, and any nonmagical wand and they can make that thing.
Now I’m confused.
So based on the Artificer -
Infusions Known
When you gain this feature, pick four artificer infusions to learn, choosing from the “Artificer Infusions” section at the end of the class’s description. You learn additional infusions of your choice when you reach certain levels in this class, as shown in the Infusions Known column of the Artificer table.
Whenever you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the artificer infusions you learned with a new one.
And then looking up the Replicate -
Replicate Magic Item
Using this infusion, you replicate a particular magic item. You can learn this infusion multiple times; each time you do so, choose a magic item that you can make with it, picking from the Replicable Items tables. A table’s title tells you the level you must be in the class to choose an item from the table. Alternatively, you can choose the magic item from among the common magic items in the game, not including potions or scrolls.
In the tables, an item’s entry tells you whether the item requires attunement. See the item’s description in the Dungeon Master’s Guide for more information about it, including the type of object required for its making.
Looks as if a 2nd level Artificer could Replicate the Wand of Secrets. They would not have to have seen it or have one.
They simply know how to replicate (which means make an exact copy of it).
So if the Artificer burns ones of his Infusions making this - it should technically work, how I read it.
(Mind you - I hate the Artificer class as a DM, myself, because it feels a little over powered... but I finally allowed it in my game and now have a player who is an Artificer, but he pretty much modeled his character after Iron Man, making armor and flying boots).
Granted the explanation could definitely use some work for the Artificer.
(Mind you - I hate the Artificer class as a DM, myself, because it feels a little over powered... but I finally allowed it in my game and now have a player who is an Artificer, but he pretty much modeled his character after Iron Man, making armor and flying boots).
What gives you that impression? In most rankings I've seen, it's one of the lowest, only consistently above Monk. It's a half caster that lacks another half.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
(Mind you - I hate the Artificer class as a DM, myself, because it feels a little over powered... but I finally allowed it in my game and now have a player who is an Artificer, but he pretty much modeled his character after Iron Man, making armor and flying boots).
What gives you that impression? In most rankings I've seen, it's one of the lowest, only consistently above Monk. It's a half caster that lacks another half.
Well, it's a half-caster, that can wear good armor. So right there, puts it up there with a Paladin. (I can tank, I can cast!) And then add that they can create magic items "at a whim" (for infusing) - and not even just for themselves. They can hand it to a party member too. So it can quickly make a party all have flying boots at some point, just as a quick example.
That said, the only item I don't allow the Artificer to create is the Bag of Holding. And that's solely because the Bag of Holding has a special lore in my world (created by the players' actions which created a fun moment - not because I thought it was overpowered).
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
Heh - now I am confused too.
Couldn't he just pick up a stick and say, "Look a Wand of Secrets!" (if the item was just going to be fake? There'd be nothing he'd need to roll as an Artificer - if he's not technically infusing an item?) I mean, other than a Persuasion Check or Deception Check for people to believe it's a Wand of Secrets?
He way buying it not fooling people that’s it’s real and he wanted to replicate the item that’s a fake.
What?
It's hard to tell, but I think both you and the player completely misunderstand how Replicate Magic Item works. Maybe you should both read the Infuse Item and Replicate Magic Item bits of Artificer.
I have, it says nothing about needing the item, but it also says nothing about not needing the item, I take that as it’s open to interpretation.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
As I wrote in my previous post, an artificer doesn’t need an actual magic item to replicate one. For example, they wouldn’t use Replicate Magic Item on a wand of secrets to replicate another one as an infusion, they can “replicate” anything on the list whether they’ve ever encountered one for real or not. All they need is to know that Infusion, to have an Infusion slot available, and any nonmagical wand and they can make that thing.
Now I’m confused.
So based on the Artificer -
Infusions Known
When you gain this feature, pick four artificer infusions to learn, choosing from the “Artificer Infusions” section at the end of the class’s description. You learn additional infusions of your choice when you reach certain levels in this class, as shown in the Infusions Known column of the Artificer table.
Whenever you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the artificer infusions you learned with a new one.
And then looking up the Replicate -
Replicate Magic Item
Using this infusion, you replicate a particular magic item. You can learn this infusion multiple times; each time you do so, choose a magic item that you can make with it, picking from the Replicable Items tables. A table’s title tells you the level you must be in the class to choose an item from the table. Alternatively, you can choose the magic item from among the common magic items in the game, not including potions or scrolls.
In the tables, an item’s entry tells you whether the item requires attunement. See the item’s description in the Dungeon Master’s Guide for more information about it, including the type of object required for its making.
Looks as if a 2nd level Artificer could Replicate the Wand of Secrets. They would not have to have seen it or have one.
They simply know how to replicate (which means make an exact copy of it).
So if the Artificer burns ones of his Infusions making this - it should technically work, how I read it.
(Mind you - I hate the Artificer class as a DM, myself, because it feels a little over powered... but I finally allowed it in my game and now have a player who is an Artificer, but he pretty much modeled his character after Iron Man, making armor and flying boots).
Granted the explanation could definitely use some work for the Artificer.
I have bad experiences with artificers as well, once someone made a motorbike in a medieval campaign and the dm allowed it, the campaign broke then.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
Heh - now I am confused too.
Couldn't he just pick up a stick and say, "Look a Wand of Secrets!" (if the item was just going to be fake? There'd be nothing he'd need to roll as an Artificer - if he's not technically infusing an item?) I mean, other than a Persuasion Check or Deception Check for people to believe it's a Wand of Secrets?
He way buying it not fooling people that’s it’s real and he wanted to replicate the item that’s a fake.
What?
It's hard to tell, but I think both you and the player completely misunderstand how Replicate Magic Item works. Maybe you should both read the Infuse Item and Replicate Magic Item bits of Artificer.
I have, it says nothing about needing the item, but it also says nothing about not needing the item, I take that as it’s open to interpretation.
If it was needed it would say so. Since it doesn’t it isn’t.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
As I wrote in my previous post, an artificer doesn’t need an actual magic item to replicate one. For example, they wouldn’t use Replicate Magic Item on a wand of secrets to replicate another one as an infusion, they can “replicate” anything on the list whether they’ve ever encountered one for real or not. All they need is to know that Infusion, to have an Infusion slot available, and any nonmagical wand and they can make that thing.
Now I’m confused.
So based on the Artificer -
Infusions Known
When you gain this feature, pick four artificer infusions to learn, choosing from the “Artificer Infusions” section at the end of the class’s description. You learn additional infusions of your choice when you reach certain levels in this class, as shown in the Infusions Known column of the Artificer table.
Whenever you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the artificer infusions you learned with a new one.
And then looking up the Replicate -
Replicate Magic Item
Using this infusion, you replicate a particular magic item. You can learn this infusion multiple times; each time you do so, choose a magic item that you can make with it, picking from the Replicable Items tables. A table’s title tells you the level you must be in the class to choose an item from the table. Alternatively, you can choose the magic item from among the common magic items in the game, not including potions or scrolls.
In the tables, an item’s entry tells you whether the item requires attunement. See the item’s description in the Dungeon Master’s Guide for more information about it, including the type of object required for its making.
Looks as if a 2nd level Artificer could Replicate the Wand of Secrets. They would not have to have seen it or have one.
They simply know how to replicate (which means make an exact copy of it).
So if the Artificer burns ones of his Infusions making this - it should technically work, how I read it.
(Mind you - I hate the Artificer class as a DM, myself, because it feels a little over powered... but I finally allowed it in my game and now have a player who is an Artificer, but he pretty much modeled his character after Iron Man, making armor and flying boots).
Granted the explanation could definitely use some work for the Artificer.
I have bad experiences with artificers as well, once someone made a motorbike in a medieval campaign and the dm allowed it, the campaign broke then.
That was the DM’s fault, not the artificer’s. The DM should have either handled it better or not allowed it.
(Mind you - I hate the Artificer class as a DM, myself, because it feels a little over powered... but I finally allowed it in my game and now have a player who is an Artificer, but he pretty much modeled his character after Iron Man, making armor and flying boots).
What gives you that impression? In most rankings I've seen, it's one of the lowest, only consistently above Monk. It's a half caster that lacks another half.
Well, it's a half-caster, that can wear good armor. So right there, puts it up there with a Paladin. (I can tank, I can cast!) And then add that they can create magic items "at a whim" (for infusing) - and not even just for themselves. They can hand it to a party member too. So it can quickly make a party all have flying boots at some point, just as a quick example.
That said, the only item I don't allow the Artificer to create is the Bag of Holding. And that's solely because the Bag of Holding has a special lore in my world (created by the players' actions which created a fun moment - not because I thought it was overpowered).
Not so. The Artificer can only make each infusion once.
(Mind you - I hate the Artificer class as a DM, myself, because it feels a little over powered... but I finally allowed it in my game and now have a player who is an Artificer, but he pretty much modeled his character after Iron Man, making armor and flying boots).
What gives you that impression? In most rankings I've seen, it's one of the lowest, only consistently above Monk. It's a half caster that lacks another half.
Well, it's a half-caster, that can wear good armor. So right there, puts it up there with a Paladin. (I can tank, I can cast!) And then add that they can create magic items "at a whim" (for infusing) - and not even just for themselves. They can hand it to a party member too. So it can quickly make a party all have flying boots at some point, just as a quick example.
That said, the only item I don't allow the Artificer to create is the Bag of Holding. And that's solely because the Bag of Holding has a special lore in my world (created by the players' actions which created a fun moment - not because I thought it was overpowered).
Artificers only have medium armor proficiency and a d8 hit die, which means that they're not comparable to the Paladin before you even factor in features. Taking features into account, you realize that it only gets worse for Artificers. Their spell list is much worse for tanking than Paladins', they don't have any real reason to be in melee, and Paladins have the considerable HP boost that comes with Lay on Hands compared to Artificer's... nothing.
You also seem to drastically misunderstand how infusions work. They can't make magic items at a whim, they can only do it at the end of a long rest. In addition, Artificers can only maintain a certain number of infusions at once, and can only use a single instance of a specific infusion at the time.
Each of your infusions can be in only one object at a time. Moreover, no object can bear more than one of your infusions at a time. If you try to exceed your maximum number of infusions, the oldest infusion immediately ends, and then the new infusion applies.
The maximum number of infusions is shown in the Artificer label. It starts at 2, and doesn't increase to 3 until level 6. So not only can Artificers not make multiple of a single magic item for the entire party, but in addition, even if they could, they'd only start out being able to make two of them, which takes up their entire core feature (which pretty much comes at the price of actual spellcasting).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Y'all, you simply must trim your quote chains. You're killing me here.
If you want a rules answer, head to the rules forum. For what it's worth, it strikes me as unbelievably petty to not only require an Artificer player to buy the item he wants to replicate, but then also to make the one on offer be a fake. At that point just admit you don't want Artificers at your table and make the player choose a new character or quit.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
Heh - now I am confused too.
Couldn't he just pick up a stick and say, "Look a Wand of Secrets!" (if the item was just going to be fake? There'd be nothing he'd need to roll as an Artificer - if he's not technically infusing an item?) I mean, other than a Persuasion Check or Deception Check for people to believe it's a Wand of Secrets?
He way buying it not fooling people that’s it’s real and he wanted to replicate the item that’s a fake.
What?
It's hard to tell, but I think both you and the player completely misunderstand how Replicate Magic Item works. Maybe you should both read the Infuse Item and Replicate Magic Item bits of Artificer.
I have, it says nothing about needing the item, but it also says nothing about not needing the item, I take that as it’s open to interpretation.
That is fundamentally not how rules work. If something says that you can do something, you can't just say that "it's open to interpretation" whether or not you can do that thing while you're wearing the color orange just because the text doesn't explicitly say you can do the thing while wearing the color orange.
The feature says you can do something. Therefore, you can do something. No interpretation necessary.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Y'all, you simply must trim your quote chains. You're killing me here.
Right!
If you want a rules answer, head to the rules forum. For what it's worth, it strikes me as unbelievably petty to not only require an Artificer player to buy the item he wants to replicate, but then also to make the one on offer be a fake. At that point just admit you don't want Artificers at your table and make the player choose a new character or quit.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
Heh - now I am confused too.
Couldn't he just pick up a stick and say, "Look a Wand of Secrets!" (if the item was just going to be fake? There'd be nothing he'd need to roll as an Artificer - if he's not technically infusing an item?) I mean, other than a Persuasion Check or Deception Check for people to believe it's a Wand of Secrets?
He way buying it not fooling people that’s it’s real and he wanted to replicate the item that’s a fake.
What?
It's hard to tell, but I think both you and the player completely misunderstand how Replicate Magic Item works. Maybe you should both read the Infuse Item and Replicate Magic Item bits of Artificer.
I have, it says nothing about needing the item, but it also says nothing about not needing the item, I take that as it’s open to interpretation.
That is fundamentally not how rules work. If something says that you can do something, you can't just say that "it's open to interpretation" whether or not you can do that thing while you're wearing the color orange just because the text doesn't explicitly say you can do the thing while wearing the color orange.
The feature says you can do something. Therefore, you can do something. No interpretation necessary.
I love that analogy with the color orange, that puts it succinctly.
Y'all, you simply must trim your quote chains. You're killing me here.
If you want a rules answer, head to the rules forum. For what it's worth, it strikes me as unbelievably petty to not only require an Artificer player to buy the item he wants to replicate, but then also to make the one on offer be a fake. At that point just admit you don't want Artificers at your table and make the player choose a new character or quit.
There was always going to be a fake item seller, I didn’t put it there just to spite them because I hate artificers, I think artificers are a cool concept and can be a great addition to a party, also I don’t require him to buy the item, he can find one in a cellar and duplicate it. What I don’t get about it though is being able to duplicate magic that they don’t know.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
Heh - now I am confused too.
Couldn't he just pick up a stick and say, "Look a Wand of Secrets!" (if the item was just going to be fake? There'd be nothing he'd need to roll as an Artificer - if he's not technically infusing an item?) I mean, other than a Persuasion Check or Deception Check for people to believe it's a Wand of Secrets?
He way buying it not fooling people that’s it’s real and he wanted to replicate the item that’s a fake.
What?
It's hard to tell, but I think both you and the player completely misunderstand how Replicate Magic Item works. Maybe you should both read the Infuse Item and Replicate Magic Item bits of Artificer.
I have, it says nothing about needing the item, but it also says nothing about not needing the item, I take that as it’s open to interpretation.
If it was needed it would say so. Since it doesn’t it isn’t.
The latest dnd games I’ve been running have been the opposite of a sanity check. All because of one player
I'd definitely either speak to the player (if you're comfortable doing so), or pull the DM aside and speak with them, sharing your concerns.
A solid DM should look for a middle ground to ensure everyone is enjoying themselves - and if someone has an issue with a player - should reach out to the other players to see if they share the concerns. They may all be suffering in silence as well.
I’d like to except I’m the dm, the problems is coming because he’s an artificer, he chose replicate magic item as an infusion. He used replicate magic item on a fake magic item (wand of secrets), he got mad and said I cant keep nullifying his abilities when it didn’t work.
What? The Wand of Secrets isn't a fake magic item. It's in the Basic Rules and is listed as an option on the Replicate Magic Item infusion.
No, the item was a fake, it was a unmahical copy.
As I wrote in my previous post, an artificer doesn’t need an actual magic item to replicate one. For example, they wouldn’t use Replicate Magic Item on a wand of secrets to replicate another one as an infusion, they can “replicate” anything on the list whether they’ve ever encountered one for real or not. All they need is to know that Infusion, to have an Infusion slot available, and any nonmagical wand and they can make that thing.
Now I’m confused.
So based on the Artificer -
Infusions Known
When you gain this feature, pick four artificer infusions to learn, choosing from the “Artificer Infusions” section at the end of the class’s description. You learn additional infusions of your choice when you reach certain levels in this class, as shown in the Infusions Known column of the Artificer table.
Whenever you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the artificer infusions you learned with a new one.
And then looking up the Replicate -
Replicate Magic Item
Using this infusion, you replicate a particular magic item. You can learn this infusion multiple times; each time you do so, choose a magic item that you can make with it, picking from the Replicable Items tables. A table’s title tells you the level you must be in the class to choose an item from the table. Alternatively, you can choose the magic item from among the common magic items in the game, not including potions or scrolls.
In the tables, an item’s entry tells you whether the item requires attunement. See the item’s description in the Dungeon Master’s Guide for more information about it, including the type of object required for its making.
Looks as if a 2nd level Artificer could Replicate the Wand of Secrets. They would not have to have seen it or have one.
They simply know how to replicate (which means make an exact copy of it).
So if the Artificer burns ones of his Infusions making this - it should technically work, how I read it.
(Mind you - I hate the Artificer class as a DM, myself, because it feels a little over powered... but I finally allowed it in my game and now have a player who is an Artificer, but he pretty much modeled his character after Iron Man, making armor and flying boots).
Granted the explanation could definitely use some work for the Artificer.
I have bad experiences with artificers as well, once someone made a motorbike in a medieval campaign and the dm allowed it, the campaign broke then.
That was the DM’s fault, not the artificer’s. The DM should have either handled it better or not allowed it.
Okay, artificer infusions are making more sense now. Thanks everybody
I just discovered I might get a little protective of other ABTOGL members.
While I don't get angry on forums, I might get a touch peevish, and you can always tell because I start to bullet point other people's stuff so I can ream them for being a twerp.
Also, if you are looking for a great word as a replacement for something that is very ableist and frequently found all over the place, the word Twerp is perfect.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Ok, so, since we talked about "doing a romance potline" and I mentioned how mine is very predictable and pretty well laid out, I thought I would drop in the actual structure I use to design it. I mean, I stole it from romance writes, so not a big deal, lol.
It follows a specific cycle, or journey (like Campbell's Hero's Journey).
Romance Journey
plan for not one, not two, but three main character arcs. The main characters–the lovers–are arcs one and two. And then there is the relationship. The relationship gets its own arc, as though it’s a third main character.
Meet Cute
Rejection of Relationship
Giving Us a Chance
Three Dates
Need You but Can’t Have you
Come Together
Fall In Love
Break Up Misunderstanding
The Sacrifice of Pride
Declaration
Happily Ever After
1) Call to Adventure / The Meet Cute
Here’s where the lovers meet. Where the seeds of their relationship are sown. There’s both attraction and conflict. The groundwork for the potential to reach an HEA (happily-ever-after), along with enough conflict to last the length of a novel, is set.
2) Refusal of the Call / Rejection of the Relationship
One or both of the main characters are in denial about the attraction, or there’s some external reason in their way, so that this cannot possibly work out. Here the relationship is still very much at odds. We learn the reasons why the relationship won’t work, and the external plot reasons why they cannot be together. But also… there are hints that they can’t quite stop thinking about each other, and something big is going to happen between them. It’s usually a situation of “they doth protest too much.”
3) Acceptance of the Quest / Giving the relationship a chance
This is the “First Threshold” or the beginning of Act Two. For some reason, despite their attempts to stay apart, they’re forced to work together, often toward a common goal, sometimes as a reluctant agreement to date. There’s often some challenge that cannot be overcome without the other. They must accept some sort of relationship is developing, though they are still adamant HEA is not in the cards for them at all. There’s still conflict and resistance to permanence and no mentions of love, but they must face the truth: in order to continue on their journey, they will need to work together.
4) Trials and Temptations / Three Dates
This is the first relationship development section. Usually there’s a first date that happens here, and other challenges. I’ve heard Liz Pelletier of Entangled say there’s usually three dates in this section, if there are dates, which not every romance has per say. But the lovers are together for a period of time, interacting in a get-to-know-you scenario demonstrating relationship chemistry in at least three major scenes. Each scene both deepens their affinity but also reaffirms the reason they cannot be together. It’s a “three steps forward two steps back” pattern.
In many romances, this is where some major form of physical intimacy takes place. A first kiss, a first love making, a first uninhibited admittance of, “I really like having you in my life.” There’s an intense moment of believing or seeing a glimpse of how meaningful this relationship could become. But it’s quickly dashed to pieces, often by one or the other getting scared by the growing intimacy and some external plot force tearing them apart.
6) The Road Back / Pulling Back Together
Something most likely in the external plot forces them back together for some reason. They’re forced to work together, and the attraction is stronger than ever. The relationship development that had begun in the first half now deepens. Often their deepest fears are confessed, they’re left vulnerable and open to each other, and real intimacy builds.
7) The Fall
They fall for each other, hard. There’s usually another big moment of physical intimacy here, often lovemaking in a way that is meaningful. In romances where the couple has been engaging in casual sex, usually the love scene here is truly making love for the first time. They will separately admit they’ve fallen for the other, though not necessarily acknowledging it to each other. Sometimes one will declare themselves, but the other doesn’t reciprocate for some reason related to their internal flaw or wound.
8) Dark moment / The Break Up
They’re done. They’re over. The relationship is never going to happen. Their lives are in crisis. They try to go back to their ordinary world, and it’s a dismal fail. They’re irrevocably changed by the other person. They’re lost and miserable in their loneliness.
9) The Sacrifice
There’s a decision made by one or both of the lovers. Their clinging to the fear of the wound/flaw is overcome. There’s a letting go or sacrificing of the misbelief they’ve been carrying around this whole time, and giving up on the external plot reason for them not being together. The realization that whatever fear was stopping them is insignificant to their love for the other person.
10) Declaration
There’s a declaration of love, a communion of the relationship. This is where the magic of the HEA comes to completion. It’s usually at first met with some trepidation. This is their first big leap of faith and giving of their hearts to each other. The trust circle between them is complete.
11) Denouement / The HEA.
The romance reader has to have their denouement. They want a glimpse of the lovers in their new HEA world, to make sure that everything is going okay. There’s usually a scene including friends and family, gaining an acknowledgement of the new relationship from important people in their lives. There’s a renewed promise of forever.
HEA = Happily Ever After
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
*we're reviving the camp half-blood rp thread!*
I'm fry, and I make doodles. That's why they call me FRY DOODLES. Also no pressure but check out my YouTube channel (Fry Doodles)
Soli Deo Gloria(Sed servus eius crustulum vult)
I'm a disabled, neurodivergent, artsy dumpster fire, and somewhat of a clown. But, I'm also god's favorite princess and the most interesting girl in the world.
Crafter of Constellations, vocaloid enjoyer, waluigi’s #1 fan, space alien, your favorite pretty boy, and certified silly goose
Yes, quite. Thank you.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Now I’m confused.
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
He way buying it not fooling people that’s it’s real and he wanted to replicate the item that’s a fake.
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
What?
It's hard to tell, but I think both you and the player completely misunderstand how Replicate Magic Item works. Maybe you should both read the Infuse Item and Replicate Magic Item bits of Artificer.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
So based on the Artificer -
Infusions Known
When you gain this feature, pick four artificer infusions to learn, choosing from the “Artificer Infusions” section at the end of the class’s description. You learn additional infusions of your choice when you reach certain levels in this class, as shown in the Infusions Known column of the Artificer table.
Whenever you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the artificer infusions you learned with a new one.
And then looking up the Replicate -
Replicate Magic Item
Using this infusion, you replicate a particular magic item. You can learn this infusion multiple times; each time you do so, choose a magic item that you can make with it, picking from the Replicable Items tables. A table’s title tells you the level you must be in the class to choose an item from the table. Alternatively, you can choose the magic item from among the common magic items in the game, not including potions or scrolls.
In the tables, an item’s entry tells you whether the item requires attunement. See the item’s description in the Dungeon Master’s Guide for more information about it, including the type of object required for its making.
Replicable Items (2nd-Level Artificer)
Looks as if a 2nd level Artificer could Replicate the Wand of Secrets. They would not have to have seen it or have one.
They simply know how to replicate (which means make an exact copy of it).
So if the Artificer burns ones of his Infusions making this - it should technically work, how I read it.
(Mind you - I hate the Artificer class as a DM, myself, because it feels a little over powered... but I finally allowed it in my game and now have a player who is an Artificer, but he pretty much modeled his character after Iron Man, making armor and flying boots).
Granted the explanation could definitely use some work for the Artificer.
Check out my publication on DMs Guild: https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?author=Tawmis%20Logue
Check out my comedy web series - Neverending Nights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wr4-u9-zw0&list=PLbRG7dzFI-u3EJd0usasgDrrFO3mZ1lOZ
Need a character story/background written up? I do it for free (but also take donations!) - https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up
What gives you that impression? In most rankings I've seen, it's one of the lowest, only consistently above Monk. It's a half caster that lacks another half.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Well, it's a half-caster, that can wear good armor.
So right there, puts it up there with a Paladin. (I can tank, I can cast!)
And then add that they can create magic items "at a whim" (for infusing) - and not even just for themselves.
They can hand it to a party member too.
So it can quickly make a party all have flying boots at some point, just as a quick example.
That said, the only item I don't allow the Artificer to create is the Bag of Holding. And that's solely because the Bag of Holding has a special lore in my world (created by the players' actions which created a fun moment - not because I thought it was overpowered).
Check out my publication on DMs Guild: https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?author=Tawmis%20Logue
Check out my comedy web series - Neverending Nights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wr4-u9-zw0&list=PLbRG7dzFI-u3EJd0usasgDrrFO3mZ1lOZ
Need a character story/background written up? I do it for free (but also take donations!) - https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up
I have, it says nothing about needing the item, but it also says nothing about not needing the item, I take that as it’s open to interpretation.
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
I have bad experiences with artificers as well, once someone made a motorbike in a medieval campaign and the dm allowed it, the campaign broke then.
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
If it was needed it would say so. Since it doesn’t it isn’t.
That was the DM’s fault, not the artificer’s. The DM should have either handled it better or not allowed it.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Not so. The Artificer can only make each infusion once.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Artificers only have medium armor proficiency and a d8 hit die, which means that they're not comparable to the Paladin before you even factor in features. Taking features into account, you realize that it only gets worse for Artificers. Their spell list is much worse for tanking than Paladins', they don't have any real reason to be in melee, and Paladins have the considerable HP boost that comes with Lay on Hands compared to Artificer's... nothing.
You also seem to drastically misunderstand how infusions work. They can't make magic items at a whim, they can only do it at the end of a long rest. In addition, Artificers can only maintain a certain number of infusions at once, and can only use a single instance of a specific infusion at the time.
The maximum number of infusions is shown in the Artificer label. It starts at 2, and doesn't increase to 3 until level 6. So not only can Artificers not make multiple of a single magic item for the entire party, but in addition, even if they could, they'd only start out being able to make two of them, which takes up their entire core feature (which pretty much comes at the price of actual spellcasting).
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Y'all, you simply must trim your quote chains. You're killing me here.
If you want a rules answer, head to the rules forum. For what it's worth, it strikes me as unbelievably petty to not only require an Artificer player to buy the item he wants to replicate, but then also to make the one on offer be a fake. At that point just admit you don't want Artificers at your table and make the player choose a new character or quit.
That is fundamentally not how rules work. If something says that you can do something, you can't just say that "it's open to interpretation" whether or not you can do that thing while you're wearing the color orange just because the text doesn't explicitly say you can do the thing while wearing the color orange.
The feature says you can do something. Therefore, you can do something. No interpretation necessary.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Right!
Absolutely. Don’t 💩 all over a PC’s features, just refuse to allow the character of you don’t like them.
I love that analogy with the color orange, that puts it succinctly.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
There was always going to be a fake item seller, I didn’t put it there just to spite them because I hate artificers, I think artificers are a cool concept and can be a great addition to a party, also I don’t require him to buy the item, he can find one in a cellar and duplicate it. What I don’t get about it though is being able to duplicate magic that they don’t know.
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
Okay, artificer infusions are making more sense now. Thanks everybody
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
I just discovered I might get a little protective of other ABTOGL members.
While I don't get angry on forums, I might get a touch peevish, and you can always tell because I start to bullet point other people's stuff so I can ream them for being a twerp.
Also, if you are looking for a great word as a replacement for something that is very ableist and frequently found all over the place, the word Twerp is perfect.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Ok, so, since we talked about "doing a romance potline" and I mentioned how mine is very predictable and pretty well laid out, I thought I would drop in the actual structure I use to design it. I mean, I stole it from romance writes, so not a big deal, lol.
It follows a specific cycle, or journey (like Campbell's Hero's Journey).
Romance Journey
plan for not one, not two, but three main character arcs. The main characters–the lovers–are arcs one and two. And then there is the relationship. The relationship gets its own arc, as though it’s a third main character.
1) Call to Adventure / The Meet Cute
Here’s where the lovers meet. Where the seeds of their relationship are sown. There’s both attraction and conflict. The groundwork for the potential to reach an HEA (happily-ever-after), along with enough conflict to last the length of a novel, is set.
2) Refusal of the Call / Rejection of the Relationship
One or both of the main characters are in denial about the attraction, or there’s some external reason in their way, so that this cannot possibly work out. Here the relationship is still very much at odds. We learn the reasons why the relationship won’t work, and the external plot reasons why they cannot be together. But also… there are hints that they can’t quite stop thinking about each other, and something big is going to happen between them. It’s usually a situation of “they doth protest too much.”
3) Acceptance of the Quest / Giving the relationship a chance
This is the “First Threshold” or the beginning of Act Two. For some reason, despite their attempts to stay apart, they’re forced to work together, often toward a common goal, sometimes as a reluctant agreement to date. There’s often some challenge that cannot be overcome without the other. They must accept some sort of relationship is developing, though they are still adamant HEA is not in the cards for them at all. There’s still conflict and resistance to permanence and no mentions of love, but they must face the truth: in order to continue on their journey, they will need to work together.
4) Trials and Temptations / Three Dates
This is the first relationship development section. Usually there’s a first date that happens here, and other challenges. I’ve heard Liz Pelletier of Entangled say there’s usually three dates in this section, if there are dates, which not every romance has per say. But the lovers are together for a period of time, interacting in a get-to-know-you scenario demonstrating relationship chemistry in at least three major scenes. Each scene both deepens their affinity but also reaffirms the reason they cannot be together. It’s a “three steps forward two steps back” pattern.
5) Midpoint Crisis / I-need-you-but-can’t-have-you
In many romances, this is where some major form of physical intimacy takes place. A first kiss, a first love making, a first uninhibited admittance of, “I really like having you in my life.” There’s an intense moment of believing or seeing a glimpse of how meaningful this relationship could become. But it’s quickly dashed to pieces, often by one or the other getting scared by the growing intimacy and some external plot force tearing them apart.
6) The Road Back / Pulling Back Together
Something most likely in the external plot forces them back together for some reason. They’re forced to work together, and the attraction is stronger than ever. The relationship development that had begun in the first half now deepens. Often their deepest fears are confessed, they’re left vulnerable and open to each other, and real intimacy builds.
7) The Fall
They fall for each other, hard. There’s usually another big moment of physical intimacy here, often lovemaking in a way that is meaningful. In romances where the couple has been engaging in casual sex, usually the love scene here is truly making love for the first time. They will separately admit they’ve fallen for the other, though not necessarily acknowledging it to each other. Sometimes one will declare themselves, but the other doesn’t reciprocate for some reason related to their internal flaw or wound.
8) Dark moment / The Break Up
They’re done. They’re over. The relationship is never going to happen. Their lives are in crisis. They try to go back to their ordinary world, and it’s a dismal fail. They’re irrevocably changed by the other person. They’re lost and miserable in their loneliness.
9) The Sacrifice
There’s a decision made by one or both of the lovers. Their clinging to the fear of the wound/flaw is overcome. There’s a letting go or sacrificing of the misbelief they’ve been carrying around this whole time, and giving up on the external plot reason for them not being together. The realization that whatever fear was stopping them is insignificant to their love for the other person.
10) Declaration
There’s a declaration of love, a communion of the relationship. This is where the magic of the HEA comes to completion. It’s usually at first met with some trepidation. This is their first big leap of faith and giving of their hearts to each other. The trust circle between them is complete.
11) Denouement / The HEA.
The romance reader has to have their denouement. They want a glimpse of the lovers in their new HEA world, to make sure that everything is going okay. There’s usually a scene including friends and family, gaining an acknowledgement of the new relationship from important people in their lives. There’s a renewed promise of forever.
HEA = Happily Ever After
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds