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 issue comes from how different people interpret the word “replicate.” Some folks (like yourself) interpret it to mean “the character makes a copy of it,” and therefore it makes sense to assume they need an original to reference in order to create a copy. But what they instead mean is that “the PC makes a copy of it.” They’re using the word “replicate” in a meta way. The character might have heard of the item and decided to recreate one based on that knowledge. Or perhaps they just thought of one all by themselves and decided to make a prototype of one (which is what an Infusion is supposed to be, a temporary prototype). But the PC is making an (almost) exact “copy” of the magic item from the book in a mechanical sense. If one reads “replicate” from a meta standpoint it makes more sense.
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.
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 issue comes from how different people interpret the word “replicate.” Some folks (like yourself) interpret it to mean “the character makes a copy of it,” and therefore it makes sense to assume they need an original to reference in order to create a copy. But what they instead mean is that “the PC makes a copy of it.” They’re using the word “replicate” in a meta way. The character might have heard of the item and decided to recreate one based on that knowledge. Or perhaps they just thought of one all by themselves and decided to make a prototype of one (which is what an Infusion is supposed to be, a temporary prototype). But the PC is making an (almost) exact “copy” of the magic item from the book in a mechanical sense. If one reads “replicate” from a meta standpoint it makes more sense.
I will take this a tiny step further and note that an Artificer doesn't have to make the exact kind of thing, they are making a version of the thing.
That is, the Wand of Secrets? An Artificer who has that infusion can make a ring of secrets, a hairpin of secrets, an alarm clock of secrets, a an amulet or hat or caltrop or...
They are not limited to the that specific form of a wand -- although the way the thing works will mostly be some variation of how the wand does.
For example, the Alarm clock of secrets might only reveal a secrets when the alarm goes off. The hairpin my suddenly stop holding hair and fall to the ground, stopping to point at the secret.
This is why they say replicate: it is not "duplicate" in the sense that it means "make a copy of", it means "make an object like that one thing that did this".
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
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.
Out of curiosity, who are you protecting?
Oh, no one who needs it, lol.
But someone got a little snippy with Wysperra, lol. I took umbrage.
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
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.
Out of curiosity, who are you protecting?
Oh, no one who needs it, lol.
But someone got a little snippy with Wysperra, lol. I took umbrage.
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
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 issue comes from how different people interpret the word “replicate.” Some folks (like yourself) interpret it to mean “the character makes a copy of it,” and therefore it makes sense to assume they need an original to reference in order to create a copy. But what they instead mean is that “the PC makes a copy of it.” They’re using the word “replicate” in a meta way. The character might have heard of the item and decided to recreate one based on that knowledge. Or perhaps they just thought of one all by themselves and decided to make a prototype of one (which is what an Infusion is supposed to be, a temporary prototype). But the PC is making an (almost) exact “copy” of the magic item from the book in a mechanical sense. If one reads “replicate” from a meta standpoint it makes more sense.
The Artificer does know how to make the items without having an item on hand to reference. Artificers are the people who made the items in the first place. That's what being an Artificer is all about.
Just like you're meant to assume Wizards are often studying in their off time, so are Artificers.
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.
[nervously checks if you've ever used the bullet points on me]
That's a joke. I might be a little more willing to drill into such web data than the average bear, but that would be a little too obsessive even for me. I'll keep my eyes open though, lol.
QOTD (yes, for me there's barely any Day left, but nevertheless): Any Gunpla builders in here? I'm gonna be trying a new display idea that I haven't seen anybody do before. Using a fully enclosed plastic display case, I want to drill little holes with my hand drill and pass transparent string or fishing line through them, making them taut across various angles inside the case. Then attach pieces (in this case, the GUND-Bits for the HG Aerial) to those strands, so they appear to be hovering, the way they do in the cartoon. It's going to take some planning and it won't be changeable much after assembly but I think it might look really cool.
I will take this a tiny step further and note that an Artificer doesn't have to make the exact kind of thing, they are making a version of the thing.
That is, the Wand of Secrets? An Artificer who has that infusion can make a ring of secrets, a hairpin of secrets, an alarm clock of secrets, a an amulet or hat or caltrop or...
They are not limited to the that specific form of a wand -- although the way the thing works will mostly be some variation of how the wand does.
For example, the Alarm clock of secrets might only reveal a secrets when the alarm goes off. The hairpin my suddenly stop holding hair and fall to the ground, stopping to point at the secret.
This is why they say replicate: it is not "duplicate" in the sense that it means "make a copy of", it means "make an object like that one thing that did this".
Well, I'm not sure about that.
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
So it seems that when the Alchemy Jug says it's a ceramic jug that appears to be able to hold a gallon of liquid, that also means that the mundane item you're infusing has to match that description.
I'll note that I would personally let Artificers replicate magic items on unique mundane items much like you gave examples of (with the exception of clothing articles like cloaks, since they're not meant to be stackable), because customization in that way is a lot of what Artificer is to me. I'd just be cautious about stating such a thing as fact like you seem to be doing, considering it contradicts the rules.
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)
IAmSposta: The issue comes from how different people interpret the word “replicate.” Some folks (like yourself) interpret it to mean “the character makes a copy of it,” and therefore it makes sense to assume they need an original to reference in order to create a copy. But what they instead mean is that “the PC makes a copy of it.” They’re using the word “replicate” in a meta way. The character might have heard of the item and decided to recreate one based on that knowledge. Or perhaps they just thought of one all by themselves and decided to make a prototype of one (which is what an Infusion is supposed to be, a temporary prototype). But the PC is making an (almost) exact “copy” of the magic item from the book in a mechanical sense. If one reads “replicate” from a meta standpoint it makes more sense.
A simple line such as: The Artificer does not have to have ever been in possession or seen the item; through their intense studying they understand how to replicate the below items:
And then provide a list. That would certainly remove any doubt on how it's left to be read.
AEDorsay: I will take this a tiny step further and note that an Artificer doesn't have to make the exact kind of thing, they are making a version of the thing. That is, the Wand of Secrets? An Artificer who has that infusion can make a ring of secrets, a hairpin of secrets, an alarm clock of secrets, a an amulet or hat or caltrop or... They are not limited to the that specific form of a wand -- although the way the thing works will mostly be some variation of how the wand does. For example, the Alarm clock of secrets might only reveal a secrets when the alarm goes off. The hairpin my suddenly stop holding hair and fall to the ground, stopping to point at the secret. This is why they say replicate: it is not "duplicate" in the sense that it means "make a copy of", it means "make an object like that one thing that did this".
I would say as a homebrew, that might work. But ruling wise, because they use the word replicate which literally means to make an exact copy of - I would say it would be exactly like the item - so a Wand of Secrets would need to be a wand and not a Dagger of Secrets, for example.
ChoirOfFire: QOTD (yes, for me there's barely any Day left, but nevertheless): Any Gunpla builders in here? I'm gonna be trying a new display idea that I haven't seen anybody do before. Using a fully enclosed plastic display case, I want to drill little holes with my hand drill and pass transparent string or fishing line through them, making them taut across various angles inside the case. Then attach pieces (in this case, the GUND-Bits for the HG Aerial) to those strands, so they appear to be hovering, the way they do in the cartoon. It's going to take some planning and it won't be changeable much after assembly but I think it might look really cool.
I've never heard of what a Gunpla was? So I googled it - and it appears to be a Gundum thing?
I assume you're going for something like this: https://i.redd.it/jn7sbhcavq911.jpg - without the plastic base lifting them - but rather strings to give the illusion of flying?
Ok I'll grant it is likely a homebrew viewpoint, but I think in terms of both the older stuff and the mechanics of it, so perhaps I conceive it differently.
Artificers were around a very long time -- I never really liked them. But that was originally one of the big things with them -- they could do this crazy stuff. There was a whole "within reason" way of thinking, that I often see absent in 5 (in part because, well, half the population is unreasonable, lol, statistically, and the game has a LOT more folks playing).
So, for example, on the jug -- probably wouldn't allow it on an alarm clock, since it does have to "hold" something.
Since I don't generally have them, I wasn't aware they had so incredibly limited the class, and I apologize for bad advice.
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
I assume you're going for something like this: https://i.redd.it/jn7sbhcavq911.jpg - without the plastic base lifting them - but rather strings to give the illusion of flying?
Yeah! But I don't think the strings will be strong enough to hold up the entire figure. Instead, I want them to hold the, I guess you'd call them autonomous drones, that fly around the Aerial (some other suits have similar things, like the Hi-Nu Gundam). I think I'll need each one fixed on 2 axes so they don't rotate? Which could be a real hassle.
First, a QotD! (Also go back and read Choir’s! I can’t offer anything, but I’m certain many others can!) So, is there anything that you have always done wrong (since you started playing) that has become part of how you and your group play the game?
For our group, we implemented a rule where you could role seven ability scores and drop the lowest. It kind of stuck around, and while I’ve stopped using it, almost everyone in our group and who has played with us still uses it, and I use it occasionally.
Secondly, I ask that those of you who can spare it go and support Matthew Zubtitsky on Kickstarter for his game Darkstorm Adventures, which is a module for both 5e and PF 2e. He’s doing his best to bring the RPG community together with an adventure for both systems and he deserves more. I am not affiliated with him in any way, I just want to see this indie developer succeed! Wouldn’t you want the same if it were your project? So let’s make a difference for someone!
First, a QotD! So, is there anything that you have always done wrong (since you started playing) that has become part of how you and your group play the game?
persnickety me thinks the definition of "wrong" is going to go a long way here, lol. I will choose to presume you mean something that does not follow the RAW.
In which case my answer is at some point, in some way, pretty much everything to some degree or other, lol.
So, for example, the previously mentioned rule about how mages get their spells. in 1e, I and a lot of other folks simply let the player's choose their spells. That was wrong. However, it was also so common that by 3e it was the way it was done. And now we've gone back to that old way (but probably wouldn't do it in someone else's game until we came to trust the Dm wouldn't screw with us).
A lot of folks have said the 4d6 method is "wrong". Except that was in the 1e DMG.
But if there was anything that I have done consistently since 1982 through today that is in defiance of the rules regardless of the game version, it is that I do not describe Intelligence as Intelligence. I describe and conceive and think of it as Knowledge. To the point I call the stat Knowledge these days, and until they strip Intelligence out, that's all I will call it.
Because back in the bad days, the game treated intelligence with the same general racism it treated a lot of other stuff, and that led to a lot of folks equating it with IQ, and that's an even MORE racist construct, and what actually matters and can be role played is knowledge, not some bizarre measure of processing capacity that knowledge can actually overwhelm and manipulate.
I probably have a lot more stuff. But not much that has been "consistent", since some stuff the game later made "normal" and other stuff in the game changed and we still prefer the other way.
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
That's really cool! Did you collect a lot of copies or just print them?
Back then? Yes. I often bought multiple copies of comics I really enjoyed. I also did it with comic book trading cards, which is where I started doing it originally. Because you'd open all these comic book trading cards and end up with tons of duplicates.
First, a QotD! So, is there anything that you have always done wrong (since you started playing) that has become part of how you and your group play the game?
persnickety me thinks the definition of "wrong" is going to go a long way here, lol. I will choose to presume you mean something that does not follow the RAW.
In which case my answer is at some point, in some way, pretty much everything to some degree or other, lol.
So, for example, the previously mentioned rule about how mages get their spells. in 1e, I and a lot of other folks simply let the player's choose their spells. That was wrong. However, it was also so common that by 3e it was the way it was done. And now we've gone back to that old way (but probably wouldn't do it in someone else's game until we came to trust the Dm wouldn't screw with us).
A lot of folks have said the 4d6 method is "wrong". Except that was in the 1e DMG.
But if there was anything that I have done consistently since 1982 through today that is in defiance of the rules regardless of the game version, it is that I do not describe Intelligence as Intelligence. I describe and conceive and think of it as Knowledge. To the point I call the stat Knowledge these days, and until they strip Intelligence out, that's all I will call it.
Because back in the bad days, the game treated intelligence with the same general racism it treated a lot of other stuff, and that led to a lot of folks equating it with IQ, and that's an even MORE racist construct, and what actually matters and can be role played is knowledge, not some bizarre measure of processing capacity that knowledge can actually overwhelm and manipulate.
I probably have a lot more stuff. But not much that has been "consistent", since some stuff the game later made "normal" and other stuff in the game changed and we still prefer the other way.
I love this answer!
To clarify, by wrong I just meant “What rule just felt like it should be different or you genuinely misunderstood it?”
If you don’t have one that translates between editions, go for one that lasted for just one edition that you played.
The Central Intelligence Agency isn't called that because it's staffed by geniuses. I mean, it might BE staffed by geniuses, I wouldn't know, this isn't a slight against the CIA, although I'm sure they both deserve it and can take it. Point is, I think Intelligence as a metric of how well-informed a character is makes sense. At least in the abstract.
I always forget you don't fully refresh your HD on a long rest. I feel bad about it, because I'm sure I've recovered like, dozens of HP that I wasn't entitled to. In my defense, it's a weird rule.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The issue comes from how different people interpret the word “replicate.” Some folks (like yourself) interpret it to mean “the character makes a copy of it,” and therefore it makes sense to assume they need an original to reference in order to create a copy. But what they instead mean is that “the PC makes a copy of it.” They’re using the word “replicate” in a meta way. The character might have heard of the item and decided to recreate one based on that knowledge. Or perhaps they just thought of one all by themselves and decided to make a prototype of one (which is what an Infusion is supposed to be, a temporary prototype). But the PC is making an (almost) exact “copy” of the magic item from the book in a mechanical sense. If one reads “replicate” from a meta standpoint it makes more sense.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Out of curiosity, who are you protecting?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I will take this a tiny step further and note that an Artificer doesn't have to make the exact kind of thing, they are making a version of the thing.
That is, the Wand of Secrets? An Artificer who has that infusion can make a ring of secrets, a hairpin of secrets, an alarm clock of secrets, a an amulet or hat or caltrop or...
They are not limited to the that specific form of a wand -- although the way the thing works will mostly be some variation of how the wand does.
For example, the Alarm clock of secrets might only reveal a secrets when the alarm goes off. The hairpin my suddenly stop holding hair and fall to the ground, stopping to point at the secret.
This is why they say replicate: it is not "duplicate" in the sense that it means "make a copy of", it means "make an object like that one thing that did this".
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
Oh, no one who needs it, lol.
But someone got a little snippy with Wysperra, lol. I took umbrage.
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
Oh? I missed that.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
"more actions for martials"...
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
Oh, this makes a lot of sense. Thx and sorry all.
Characters (Links!):
Faelin Nighthollow - 7th Sojourn
What is ABTOGL?
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
The Artificer does know how to make the items without having an item on hand to reference. Artificers are the people who made the items in the first place. That's what being an Artificer is all about.
Just like you're meant to assume Wizards are often studying in their off time, so are Artificers.
OMG I'm so stupid. Acronyms fly right over my head y'all
Your friendly trans bard!
She/They pronouns
The Goddess of the Strings (thanks for the title Drummer!)
[nervously checks if you've ever used the bullet points on me]
That's a joke. I might be a little more willing to drill into such web data than the average bear, but that would be a little too obsessive even for me. I'll keep my eyes open though, lol.
QOTD (yes, for me there's barely any Day left, but nevertheless): Any Gunpla builders in here? I'm gonna be trying a new display idea that I haven't seen anybody do before. Using a fully enclosed plastic display case, I want to drill little holes with my hand drill and pass transparent string or fishing line through them, making them taut across various angles inside the case. Then attach pieces (in this case, the GUND-Bits for the HG Aerial) to those strands, so they appear to be hovering, the way they do in the cartoon. It's going to take some planning and it won't be changeable much after assembly but I think it might look really cool.
Well, I'm not sure about that.
So it seems that when the Alchemy Jug says it's a ceramic jug that appears to be able to hold a gallon of liquid, that also means that the mundane item you're infusing has to match that description.
I'll note that I would personally let Artificers replicate magic items on unique mundane items much like you gave examples of (with the exception of clothing articles like cloaks, since they're not meant to be stackable), because customization in that way is a lot of what Artificer is to me. I'd just be cautious about stating such a thing as fact like you seem to be doing, considering it contradicts the rules.
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)
IAmSposta:
The issue comes from how different people interpret the word “replicate.” Some folks (like yourself) interpret it to mean “the character makes a copy of it,” and therefore it makes sense to assume they need an original to reference in order to create a copy. But what they instead mean is that “the PC makes a copy of it.” They’re using the word “replicate” in a meta way. The character might have heard of the item and decided to recreate one based on that knowledge. Or perhaps they just thought of one all by themselves and decided to make a prototype of one (which is what an Infusion is supposed to be, a temporary prototype). But the PC is making an (almost) exact “copy” of the magic item from the book in a mechanical sense. If one reads “replicate” from a meta standpoint it makes more sense.
A simple line such as: The Artificer does not have to have ever been in possession or seen the item; through their intense studying they understand how to replicate the below items:
And then provide a list. That would certainly remove any doubt on how it's left to be read.
AEDorsay:
I will take this a tiny step further and note that an Artificer doesn't have to make the exact kind of thing, they are making a version of the thing.
That is, the Wand of Secrets? An Artificer who has that infusion can make a ring of secrets, a hairpin of secrets, an alarm clock of secrets, a an amulet or hat or caltrop or...
They are not limited to the that specific form of a wand -- although the way the thing works will mostly be some variation of how the wand does.
For example, the Alarm clock of secrets might only reveal a secrets when the alarm goes off. The hairpin my suddenly stop holding hair and fall to the ground, stopping to point at the secret. This is why they say replicate: it is not "duplicate" in the sense that it means "make a copy of", it means "make an object like that one thing that did this".
I would say as a homebrew, that might work. But ruling wise, because they use the word replicate which literally means to make an exact copy of - I would say it would be exactly like the item - so a Wand of Secrets would need to be a wand and not a Dagger of Secrets, for example.
ChoirOfFire:
QOTD (yes, for me there's barely any Day left, but nevertheless): Any Gunpla builders in here? I'm gonna be trying a new display idea that I haven't seen anybody do before. Using a fully enclosed plastic display case, I want to drill little holes with my hand drill and pass transparent string or fishing line through them, making them taut across various angles inside the case. Then attach pieces (in this case, the GUND-Bits for the HG Aerial) to those strands, so they appear to be hovering, the way they do in the cartoon. It's going to take some planning and it won't be changeable much after assembly but I think it might look really cool.
I've never heard of what a Gunpla was? So I googled it - and it appears to be a Gundum thing?
I assume you're going for something like this: https://i.redd.it/jn7sbhcavq911.jpg - without the plastic base lifting them - but rather strings to give the illusion of flying?
Eons ago - I used to make 3D comics - similar (but I was nowhere near this good: https://www.reddit.com/r/crafts/comments/c17i4i/ive_been_making_3d_comic_book_covers_for_a_while/ - but same idea...)
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
Eeep.
Ok I'll grant it is likely a homebrew viewpoint, but I think in terms of both the older stuff and the mechanics of it, so perhaps I conceive it differently.
Artificers were around a very long time -- I never really liked them. But that was originally one of the big things with them -- they could do this crazy stuff. There was a whole "within reason" way of thinking, that I often see absent in 5 (in part because, well, half the population is unreasonable, lol, statistically, and the game has a LOT more folks playing).
So, for example, on the jug -- probably wouldn't allow it on an alarm clock, since it does have to "hold" something.
Since I don't generally have them, I wasn't aware they had so incredibly limited the class, and I apologize for bad advice.
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
Yeah! But I don't think the strings will be strong enough to hold up the entire figure. Instead, I want them to hold the, I guess you'd call them autonomous drones, that fly around the Aerial (some other suits have similar things, like the Hi-Nu Gundam). I think I'll need each one fixed on 2 axes so they don't rotate? Which could be a real hassle.
That's really cool! Did you collect a lot of copies or just print them?
‘Tis a new day and I bring two things!
First, a QotD! (Also go back and read Choir’s! I can’t offer anything, but I’m certain many others can!) So, is there anything that you have always done wrong (since you started playing) that has become part of how you and your group play the game?
For our group, we implemented a rule where you could role seven ability scores and drop the lowest. It kind of stuck around, and while I’ve stopped using it, almost everyone in our group and who has played with us still uses it, and I use it occasionally.
Secondly, I ask that those of you who can spare it go and support Matthew Zubtitsky on Kickstarter for his game Darkstorm Adventures, which is a module for both 5e and PF 2e. He’s doing his best to bring the RPG community together with an adventure for both systems and he deserves more. I am not affiliated with him in any way, I just want to see this indie developer succeed! Wouldn’t you want the same if it were your project? So let’s make a difference for someone!
persnickety me thinks the definition of "wrong" is going to go a long way here, lol. I will choose to presume you mean something that does not follow the RAW.
In which case my answer is at some point, in some way, pretty much everything to some degree or other, lol.
So, for example, the previously mentioned rule about how mages get their spells. in 1e, I and a lot of other folks simply let the player's choose their spells. That was wrong. However, it was also so common that by 3e it was the way it was done. And now we've gone back to that old way (but probably wouldn't do it in someone else's game until we came to trust the Dm wouldn't screw with us).
A lot of folks have said the 4d6 method is "wrong". Except that was in the 1e DMG.
But if there was anything that I have done consistently since 1982 through today that is in defiance of the rules regardless of the game version, it is that I do not describe Intelligence as Intelligence. I describe and conceive and think of it as Knowledge. To the point I call the stat Knowledge these days, and until they strip Intelligence out, that's all I will call it.
Because back in the bad days, the game treated intelligence with the same general racism it treated a lot of other stuff, and that led to a lot of folks equating it with IQ, and that's an even MORE racist construct, and what actually matters and can be role played is knowledge, not some bizarre measure of processing capacity that knowledge can actually overwhelm and manipulate.
I probably have a lot more stuff. But not much that has been "consistent", since some stuff the game later made "normal" and other stuff in the game changed and we still prefer the other way.
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
Back then? Yes. I often bought multiple copies of comics I really enjoyed. I also did it with comic book trading cards, which is where I started doing it originally. Because you'd open all these comic book trading cards and end up with tons of duplicates.
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 love this answer!
To clarify, by wrong I just meant “What rule just felt like it should be different or you genuinely misunderstood it?”
If you don’t have one that translates between editions, go for one that lasted for just one edition that you played.
The Central Intelligence Agency isn't called that because it's staffed by geniuses. I mean, it might BE staffed by geniuses, I wouldn't know, this isn't a slight against the CIA, although I'm sure they both deserve it and can take it. Point is, I think Intelligence as a metric of how well-informed a character is makes sense. At least in the abstract.
I always forget you don't fully refresh your HD on a long rest. I feel bad about it, because I'm sure I've recovered like, dozens of HP that I wasn't entitled to. In my defense, it's a weird rule.