D&D 5e: Continued Thoughts on High Level Adventuring

What a weird ride! My players have now conquered the first half of their post-15 campaign (i.e. they've completed one of the two modules I updated). (For my initial thoughts, check out the first post in this series.)

There are some very sharp contrasts between running adventures below 15th, and running adventures after 15th. Here are a few of the things I've noticed:

1. Travel is completely different. When PCs have daily or routine access to teleportation items, plane shift, and eventually gate, travel is no longer an issue. (For example, even if you don't have access to a teleport spell, two plane shifts or two gates can serve the same function! Yes, it takes two higher level spell slots, but these PCs have those slots!) This changes how PCs conceive of an adventure--and certainly how the DM needs to. No longer is distance in any way related to the number of encounters or the time it takes to journey; characters looking at going from their mountain stronghold into a nearby city and characters looking to travel from that same stronghold to a city on a different continent are likely to consider exactly the same magical--and instant--forms of travel to get there. Even if the characters don't know where they want to go, they have access to a whole bevy of new spells (and/or items and/or NPC contacts) who do know: legend lore, scrying, commune, contact other plane, divination, find the path--each offers another window into the unknown, and having access to a combination of them solves a lot of riddles and mysteries without ever leaving home! The end result is that even if they didn't know where they needed a to go, one hint or clue can lead them to the right place to begin their investigations in earnest within perhaps an hour of game-world time. Gone are the early adventuring days where a single clue would form the basis of a month's adventure to a distant hermit to find an answer to a long-forgotten problem.
2. Rests are completely different. This is somewhat a corollary to the ideas on travel: because PCs are so incredibly mobile, there are very few times when the right move is not to simply retreat to their magically fortified (and possibly well-staffed) home base whenever they need to rest and recharge. Even if going all the way home is not an option, the PCs may have access to spells or items which are even better than going home. Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion (level 8) presents an opulent version of a home away from home, but even a Leomund's Tiny Hut (level 3) can get the job done, offering PCs time to rest and recharge for either a short or a long rest. In addition to the travel changes removing a lot of the "random encounters" on the road, the rest protection options remove many of the dangers of "taking a rest." Only time remains to consistently work against these high level PCs!
   
3. Fights are extremely swingy. High level monsters hit often and they hit hard. High level PCs
   
   do the same. Similar to the first few levels of adventuring, it becomes really important that the party tanks (or those with high hp) are taking the hits, while the squishier members of the party are free to control the field or deal damage. Spells that cause an opponent to lose an action or which limit the kind of actions they can take become useful (in my opinion) for the first time. Causing a goblin boss in a low level fight to sacrifice an action is no big deal; an action may have done some damage, but realistically he probably has surrounded himself with a horde of lower level goblins who can deal almost as much damage in a round! On the other hand, causing a dragon, an eight-armed sword-fighter, a high level warlord, or a wizard with 9th level spells to lose an action is tremendous. Each one can do a tremendous amount of damage (or exert a lot of control) in a single round, and forcing a delay tilts the action economy into the hands of the PCs rather nicely. PCs at this level are even more resilient than I had first believed they would be; even when fighting a variety of opponents--each of whom, on their own, would be a worthy challenge for the PCs--the wide range of abilities and synergies the party has access to made them incredibly powerful. The big boss fight at the end of the adventure was spectacular, but when the dust settled, the PCs could probably have done another fight of equal caliber and survived. Then again, it's possible that the PCs could have made one poor choice and the whole fight would have become a rout.
   
4. Even experienced players (and DMs) feel uncertainty. A D&D player from any edition knows what to do when they encounter magic missile, cure light wounds, a locked door, or a new +1 longsword. They've seen all of this before in a dozen, even a hundred iterations. But how many times have players had access to wish? When you're dealing with entirely virgin territory, it's natural for all people involved to feel a bit uncertain. This is both the fun and the terror of the high level campaign. All of my players made some amazing choices and did some epic, heroic feats over the course of the adventure. One that sticks in my mind is when our cleric prayed to his god (Moradin) for intercession to resist the heat of the unholy furnace the party was headed into. Because his character is such a high level, the odds were significantly better than they would have been normally, and a good roll meant that Moradin granted the prayer! The fire resistance the party picked up was (in my opinion) the difference between an easy boss fight and a potentially deadly one. Without a wizard, this party managed to magically solve a problem they didn't legitimately have a spell or a magic item for. That is high level adventuring at its finest.

As this party of characters moves into what will likely be their final adventure together, they're all
level 18. Those high level abilities most players only dream about their characters having are a reality--or just one or two short levels away. For me, it's going to be a challenge to challenge them. High level encounters each have to be set pieces; no more random bandits or wandering monsters, no more minor problems or careless issues. For these characters to be involved, the threat to the world has to be real, imminent, and disastrous!

And it is.

Stay tuned for more thoughts on high level adventuring as my players take their characters to the brink and maybe a bit beyond!

D&D 5e: The Artificer Class, Unveiled!

For the last many months, I've been working on how to create an Artificer class which would work under the D&D 5e rule set. With the advent of the new SRD, I was able to justify spending the additional time to attempt to polish and eventually publish my ideas.

As such, I'm happy to unveil the Artifice class for 5e on the DMs Guild website. You can download your copy for free (or you can chip in a donation if you feel like it).

Here's the link: Artificer Class

If you're coming to this site for the first time and you're interested in some of my thought process on how the class was developed, you can check them out here on the blog. Roughly, the development followed these steps:

1. The Overview of the Problem
2. Permanent Item Creation
3. Infusions and Class Features
4. Archetypes and Finishing Touches 

Of course, even after the fourth blog post, I worked for another few months (on and off) to refine the design. Ultimately, it needs some play-testing from new eyes to really get any remaining kinks out!

Please feel free to drop some commentary in the comments; I'm looking forward to updating this little labor of love.

In the meantime, if you do give it a quick read-through, don't forget to rate it!

D&D 5e: Solving the Artificer Problem (Part 4)

Many months ago, I began considering the problem of how to bring an Eberron-style Artificer class to life in 5e. I continued that line of thinking into how magical item creation might function, and then considered how to deal with infusions. As stated at the end of that third article, I think it's time to consider how the class's features will look, and to consider what a basic archetype might look like.

Let's take a look at a "generic" class chart (without any archetypes):

 

So, how to flesh this out? Let's start with the simple stuff:
-----------------------------------
Class Features:
As an Artificer, you gain the following class features.

Hit Points: 
Hit Dice: 1d8 per Artificer level
Hit Points at 1st level: 8 + your Constitution modifier
Hit Points at Higher Levels: 1d8 (or 5) + your constitution modifier per artificer level after 1st.

Proficiencies: 
Armor: Light armor
Weapons: Simple weapons
Tools: Thieves tools and one other tool set of your choice

Saving Throws: Intelligence, Charisma
Skills: Choose two skills from Arcana, History, Investigation, Medicine, Nature, and Religion, then two additional skills of your choice.

Infusion Magic: 

As a tinkerer and meddler in all things magical, you have learned how to create infusions of magical power. Through a unique and idiosyncratic combination of intuition, scholarly training, and observation, you've learned to infuse ordinary objects with magical power. In many ways, this allows you to mimic spells cast by more conventional magic users.

In order to create an infusion, you need to have bound yourself to an Artificer focus. This focus can be mundane or magical, but it must be present on your person to cast infusions. Infusions work in one of two ways; if the spell has a range of touch, it must be cast onto an item/object; if the spell has a range greater than touch, it is cast into or through your focus.

You may bind yourself to a new focus during a long rest; this removes your connection to any previous focus.

Use the Wizard spell list to learn your spells from.

Cantrips:
You know two Wizard cantrips of your choice from the Wizard cantrip list. You learn additional wizard cantrips of your choice at higher levels, as shown on the Warlock Cantrips Known table.

Spell Slots:
The Warlock table shows how many spell slots you have. The table also shows what the level of those slots is; all of your slots are of the same level. To cast one of your Wizard spells of 1st level or higher, you must expend a spell slot. You regain all expended spell slots when you finish a short or long rest. Starting at 13th level, your spell slots become 6th level.


Spells Known of 1st Level and Higher
At 1st level, you know two 1st-level spells of your choice from the Wizard spell list.

The Spells Known column of the Warlock table shows when you learn more Wizard spells of your choice of 1st level and higher with one exception: starting at 13th level, your spell slots become 6th level. A spell you choose must be a of a level no higher than what's shown in the table's Slot Level column for your level.

When you reach 6th level, for example, you may learn spells of 1st, 2nd, or 3rd level.

Additionally, when you gain a level in this class, you can choose one of the wizard spells you know and replace it with another spell from the wizard spell list, which must also be for a level for which you have spell slots.

Spellcasting Ability:
Charisma is your spellcasting ability for your Artificer infusions, so you use Charisma whenever a spell refers to your spellcasting ability. In addition, you use your Charisma modifier when setting the saving throw DC for an Artificer infusion you cast and when making an attack roll with one.

Spell save DC = 8 + your proficiency bonus + your Charisma modifier

Spell attack modifier = your proficiency bonus + your Charisma modifier

Artificer Insight:
In your experience dealing with magic and magical devices, you have discovered--whether through intense study, sheer luck, or repeated experience--how to use an infusion to mimic a magical spell you have witnessed, studied, or developed that is of a spell level you can cast (as an Artificer).

Starting at 2nd level, you learn two new spells of your choice from any spell list; you will cast these as infusions. Additionally, when you gain a level in Artificer, you may choose one of your spells learned from Artificer Insight and replace it with another spell of a level you can cast (as an Artificer).

You learn an additional spell of your choice at 7th (total of 3), 12th (total of 4) and 17th (total of 5).

Magical Item Creation:
Your insight into the nature of magic and its interactions with the physical world make you uniquely suited to creating a wide variety of magical items, both permanent and temporary, even if you lack the normally associated skill set. Use of this class feature is entirely up to DM discretion.

Starting at second level, you may create Spell Scrolls for spells you know. You may similarly work with other spellcasters to create Spell Scrolls for spells that they know. You may only create Spell Scrolls for spell levels which you know (or for levels of infusions you are able to cast). An Artificer may scribe a scroll for a spell without using up the source. For example, an Artificer may duplicate a scroll in his possession, may mimic a spell from a wizard's spellbook, or may scribe a scroll from a spell known by a cooperating and ever-present spellcaster who is assisting in the preparation and crafting of the scroll.

[Assume this description is much longer, banking off of the magical item creation discussion in the previous entry. See that article for details.]

 -----------------------------------

 Not bad! We've waded through the initial crunch, but now it's time to consider the third level and (likely) the archetypes. For our purposes, I'm going to start with thinking about the three possibilities I came up with in my last post on this subject and go from there:

• the Wandloren (an implement-focused Artificer who ekes additional life and utility out of magical wands, rods, and staves to make them more potent)
• the Tinker (a true jack-of-all-trades who dabbles in many skills and magics, rivaling the bard in esoteric knowledge), 
• the Mechanist (a magical craftsman who seeks to make machines, homunculi, and other golems or golem-like creatures)
• the Magewright (an artificer who seeks to become a better spellcaster through creation/use of magical grimoires and other implements) 

If we take the Wandloren as our "standard" archetype, then perhaps it will look like this:

 -----------------------------------

Artificer Archetype:

At third level, you choose an archetype to assume in the pursuit of magical knowledge: Wandloren, Tinker, Mechanist, or Magewright. The Wandloren is detailed at the end of the class description. Your archetype choice grants you features at 3rd, 6th, 10th, and 14th.

Ability Score Improvement: 

When you reach 4th level, and again at 8th, 12th, 16th, and 19th level, you can increase one ability score of your choice by 2, or you can increase two ability scores of your choice by 1. As normal, you can't increase an ability score above 20 using this feature.

Artifice Mastery:

At 18th level, you have achieved such complete control over magic's interactions with the physical world that you have developed a few foolproof infusions which you may use at will. Choose a 1st-level Wizard spell and a 2nd-level Wizard spell that you know. You can now cast those spells as infusions at their lowest level at will without expending a spell slot. To cast either infusion at a higher level, you must expend a spell slot as normal. 

By spending 8 hours in study, you can exchange one or both of the spells you chose for different spells meeting the same criteria.

Grand Artifice:

At 20th level, your well of inspiration becomes nearly limitless. You may draw on inner reserves of magical power by spending one minute in contemplation of the problem or challenges that lie before you. Regain all of your expended spell slots from the Infusion Magic class feature. You must finish a long rest before you can do so again.

Artificer Archetypes: 

The Wandloren:

As a Wandloren, you are a versatile spellcaster whose strength lies in creating temporary magical implements and in maximizing the potential of more permanent magical devices. You've devoted your life to the study of wands, rods, and staves. Even the simplest non-magic stick can instantly become a magical implement in your expert hands, so attuned are you to the pathways that magic takes through such objects.

Tempered Baton:

At 3rd level, you have learned exactly what differentiates an ordinary bar, baton, or stick made of metal, bone, or wood (or other suitable material), from a magically treasured wand. Once per day, you may attune yourself to a non-magical bar, baton, or stick, imbuing it with one spell of your choice from those you are capable of infusing. This attunement takes a minute, but is otherwise follows standard attunement rules. Though the device you've created functions exactly as a wand, it can only be attuned to you and will only retain its magic until you take a long rest. You may use your Artificer Focus as your tempered baton.

The spell you choose cannot have a casting time of greater than one action, must have a spell level of three or lower, and cannot have a costly material component.

The tempered baton you create has 1d3+2 charges, and becomes a simple non-magical object when the final charge is expended. Many Wandlorens have a favored object which they give a pet name and imbue each day. 

Implement Extension:

At sixth level, your control over wands and other magical implements has been greatly improved, coaxing even greater magics from your chosen wands. When you create your tempered baton, your creation has 2d3+2 charges. Additionally, any other single permanent magical wand in your possession is considered to have two additional charges per day (or other period, as specified by the wand). 

Instead of a wand, you may endow a rod or staff with one additional charge.

In addition, you recognize magic wands simply by handling them; even the briefest physical touch lets you know the wand is magical. If you handle a magic wand for at least one full round, you know the spell stored inside as well as how many charges it has, when it recharges, and any other conditions affecting the wand's use.

Strengthened Implement: 

At tenth level, you begin to use your own power to push the limitations of wands and other implements. When you create your tempered baton, your creation may store an additional spell of first level with its own 1d4+1 charges. 

In addition, your Implement Extension feature is improved: you may now endow a rod or staff with two additional charges, or a single permanent wand attuned to you and in your possession is considered to have three additional charges (per day or other period as specified by the wand).

Wand Virtuoso:

At fourteenth level, your level of control and expertise over wands becomes so extensive that wands cannot completely fail you. When you expend the final charge of a wand, roll a d20. On a roll of a 1, the wand is not destroyed, and on a roll of a 20, the wand regains one charge. This also applies to your tempered baton (which, on any roll but a 20, does lose its magical status granted by your Tempered Baton feature).

A Wand Virtuoso is capable of breaking the laws of magic as they pertain to magical implements. Your expertise in implement magic allows you to imbue a standard melee weapon--magical or nonmagical--as your tempered baton. You still need to attune yourself to the weapon to use the wand functions as usual, but can now cast spells while wielding the weapon, rather than needing to have a the wand drawn separately.

 -----------------------------------

Let's take a look at what this class progression looks like with all of these features in place:

...and there it is! A (preliminary) 5e Artificer. To stay true to the original, I tried to stress versatility over expertise.

Let me know what you think in the comments. I think this might be ready for play-testing! My early thoughts are this iteration of the class will be wildly powerful at the mid-tier, low-powered at the beginning, and will start to fall off by the highest tiers of play.

D&D 5e: Solving the Artificer Problem (Part 3)

In my first look at converting the Artificer into a 5e playable option, I considered how best to make it happen. After settling on Artificer as a 5e class (instead of a sub-class or archetype), I considered how to solve the problem of the Artificer being a permanent magic item craftsman in the Part 2. In this third installment, I'd like to consider the much fussier and probably less easily balanced art of Artificer "spells." In other words, how should infusions work in 5e?

In 3e, infusions (as cast by Artificers) had a few key characteristics that are worth remembering:

• Infusions are not spells, though they often mimic spell effects
• Infusions only go up to 6th level/circle; the Artificer was a hybrid class with a similar progression to a 3e Bard, where 6th tier spells are the cap.
• Infusions often have a casting time of one minute.
• Infusions often have costly material components or even experience point costs.

When we think about what "pitfalls" we might encounter when converting to 5e, a few things spring to mind:

• There are no more "6-circle" spellcasters. There are full casters (9 tiers/circles/levels), hybrid casters (5 tiers/circles/levels), and "faux" casters (4 tiers/circles/levels).
• Many of the original infusions were mimicking a system in which wizards/clerics buffed the party before combat with a variety of overlapping spells; this was a system without 5e's concentration rules.
• Many of the Artificer's spells reference Use Magic Device; a skill that no longer exists.
• At least in the playtest documents, warforged (usually the primary recipient/target of the Artificer's construct-related abilities) are now considered fully alive; healing spells cast on them are no longer halved in value, making Artificers less necessary in a warforged-heavy party. In fact, I'm not even sure that the "repair" line of spells/infusions is necessary in this environment.

So to reconcile these disparate pieces:

1. Should an Artificer be a full caster (9 levels of infusions) or a hybrid caster (5 levels)? (I'm assuming that an Artificer's infusions are more important to the class than an Arcane Trickster's few wizard spells, or an Eldritch Knight's offensive repertoire.)
2. Should infusions still be "separate" from spellcasting, or are infusions to be treated as spells that happen to only target items?
3. Should infusions continue to hold fast to the cost/experience model?
4. What replaces Use Magic Device, if anything?

Finally, since we're still dealing with just a base class (and not any archetypes yet) we can afford to allow the Artificer to be a tad underpowered compared with other classes; the gap can allow for some flexibility in the archetypes.

My first instinct tells me to try Artificers as hybrid casters, and to give them more infusions per day to compensate for them note being "full casters". After all, the Bard has been upgraded, why not the Artificer? Unfortunately, I think that ruins a very elegant system by adding another variable. Similarly, the original infusion progression is quite light; I think we either need to commit to Artificers being "full" spellcasters and assign them a full spell list (for example, give them access to Cleric spells or  Wizard spells) or commit to them using the hybrid progression. For now, let's consider the hybrid progression, but we'll assign them a single 1st level infusion slot at first level (hybrid casters don't start casting until second level).

If we stick to that idea, Artificers (under the current class model) will have light armor, simple weapons, no offensive spells, no cantrips, and only a scant few infusions per level even at the upper echelons of play.

All right, clearly that won't work.

On the other hand, if we assign a full spell list (say, the Cleric list), we're assigning a huge role (healing) that didn't exist in the 3e Artificer.  Of course, this did exist in 4e, so it's not entirely out of reach. If we make Artificers spellcasters, and give them the clerical spellcasting type (cleric spell list, cantrips, progression, and preparation procedure and number of spells), we're basically back to the Artificer as an archetype of the Cleric class. Not ideal!

Back to the drawing board.

This may be where the Warlock's unorthodox spellcasting can come in handy.  If we assume that Artificers are spellcasters, but that unlike Wizards (whose studies are formal, and whose manipulation of the Weave is based on training in an artful science) or Sorcerers (whose studies are of the self, and whose manipulation of the Weave is natural and based on the science of art), the Artificer is a muddled, idiosyncratic mimicry of other spellcasters--some science, some art, all based on research and observation (rather than tradition or talent).

Perhaps as a Wizard has a spellbook, a Cleric has a holy symbol, and a Warlock has a pact item, an Artificer could have an implement/weapon that is the focus of all spellcasting. For example, an Artificer doesn't "cast" Ray of Frost, but would rather be imbuing his staff, wand, or other implement with the power to cast it--and cast it. Cantrips become (for the Artificer) spells that are stored in the implement until needed by the Artificer, which can only be called forth by the Artificer.

An Artificer could have an implement (reminiscent of 4e) which could be the focus of most Artificer spellcasting. This particular object could be mundane or magical, but it is in some way bound to the Artificer (like attunement? short rest required to change implements?). In this way, the Artificer would not (for example) be casting  the spell straight out, but would actually be funneling magic through the implement.

Another piece of Warlock spellcasting that would probably make sense for the Artificer is the reset of spell slots each short rest rather than long rest. A smaller number of slots combined with the quick recovery of those slots means that Artificers are less likely to be able to break the new concentration rules because they won't have the means to do so (all at once, anyway).

Since this discussion is already well into deep water, let's finish out this theory and see where it takes us. For 5e:

• Artificers are spellcasters. They "cast" their infusions. For our purposes, Artificers casting spells is identical to casting infusions. (With the following restriction...)
• Artificers still may not cast spells directly, but rather must infuse an object with the spell. This can either be in the form of a "buff" (spell stays in the object) or in the form of a temporary magic item creation (as in the case of making a one-charge wand to cast magic missile).
• This will need some clarification down the line. Do Artificers both infuse and cast the spell from the focus item at the same time? Is there a delay?
• Artificers use the Wizard spell list to learn spells from.
• Artificers "know" certain spells from the Wizard list.
• Artificers use the Warlock progression for spells, with a few key differences.
• Artificers know their "Cantrips Known" from the Wizard list.
• Artificers know their "Spells Known" from the Wizard list.
• Artificers use the "Invocations Known" list to choose spells from any spell list. This functions like the Bard's "Magical Secrets" ability, but comes much sooner. 
• Similar to what is stated in the Warlock entry, one spell per Artificer level gained may be swapped out as the Artificer gains experience points/levels.
•  Spells learned must be of a spell level the Artificer is capable of casting.
• Artificers may choose to learn an additional cantrip, however only this cantrip may be changed out later. (Artificers cannot use this ability to learn a new cantrip then get rid of one they learned as a first level Artificer.)
• Artificers' "Spell Slots" and "Slot Level" mechanics function as a Warlock.
• Artificers may only cast spells if they have a spell slot remaining (except cantrips)
• Spell slots recharge after a short rest 
• One small change: beginning at 13th level, the Artificers spell slots become 6th level.
• Artificers use their implement as a focus for spellcasting.
• The implement may be a weapon, shield, or other handheld object.
• It may be magical or mundane.
• For the Artificer to cast spells, he/she must be attuned (as with a magic item, although this attunement doesn't count against the limit of three magic items. If, however, the chosen item must already be attuned in order to be used, that attunement must be done separately--and in that case counts against the total of 3).

Just a few more items to consider--the ones that break the bank, so to speak.

• Artificers ignore concentration. Because the Artificer is infusing an item with magic, once a spell is cast, it remains in the item and doesn't need to be concentrated on for the duration.
• After a short or long rest, any spells cast expire, even if their duration would normally be longer than that short/long rest.

 I am hopeful that the limited spell slots granted to an Artificer make this (concentration) less of an issue. Can an Artificer make four people invisible simultaneously? Sure, but only if they're 17th level or above, and even then they have no other magical powers until they've taken a rest (except cantrips). Can an Artificer heal? Sure, but only if they use one of their (total of) eight out-of-list spells on learning a healing spell. Can an Artificer cast fireball? Sure, but it'll use up one of the Artificer's scant few spell slots!


So let's return to our questions:

1. Should an Artificer be a full caster (9 levels of infusions) or a hybrid caster (5 levels)?
   An Artificer should be based on the Warlock model, ending with six tiers of spells, at drastically reduced spell slots.
2. Should infusions still be "separate" from spellcasting, or are infusions to be treated as spells that happen to only target items?
   Both. Infusions are spells, but Artificers still focus their castings through a particular implement item.
3. Should infusions continue to hold fast to the cost/experience model?
   Not for the moment. If we bring in some of the old infusions from the 3e class, it may be prudent to do so.
4. What replaces Use Magic Device, if anything?
   For now, since we're not using any of the old infusions, we don't need this skill. If (as in an archetype) we discover a need for this, it's possible that an Arcana skill will be functional.

To round things out, I think all we'll need are some archetypes. I'll try to consider one (or more) of those in a future post. For now, I think we need one that makes the Artificer more of an implement user (think of the old wand specialists), one that makes the Artificer more of a skill user (closer to a bard/rogue with a variety of skills and/or languages), and one that makes the Artificer more of a constructer (i.e. the old-school Artificer who used homunculi and build machines).

The last thing to be ironed out before we delve into archetypes (and therefore likely the topic of the next post) will be starting proficiencies and basic class features. Until then, please feel free to comment below with any suggestions for tweaking this "alpha draft" Artificer build!

D&D 5e: Solving the Artificer Problem (Part 1)

Eberron's beauty lies in many things. To make that beauty accessible, I think we have to articulate two iconic components: the warforged race and the artificer class.

The warforged race is (comparatively) easy to shoe-horn into an existing campaign. Many, many, people have already made excellent--even exceptional--attempts to come up with appropriate ports for the warforged. One of them would likely suit anyone's game! As such, I think we can set the warforged aside and focus on the much more peculiar conundrum of the Artificer class.

At least three solid "hacks" of existing character classes have been put forward to address the void: Cleric, Warlock, and the "official" option--Wizard. Some have bandied about the idea of a Bard hack--promising, but I have yet to see anyone make the attempt.

I'm least partial to the "official" Wizard option.  Using a Wizard Tradition to create super-temporary magical effects just turns the Artificer into a wizard with a few delayed spell effects. This seems neither in keeping with Keith Baker's original vision for the class nor with a hearty sense of fun!

The Warlock option has some interesting merits, but it's still lacking the full flavor and it still seems weaker in many respects.

Baker's playtest-worthy hack is built on the Cleric chassis, using the idea of "Artifice" as a new cleric domain. This seems somewhat reasonable, particularly considering his list of features. According to Baker (as the inventor/creator of the Eberron), the 3.5 Artificer had several key features:

• "Simple weapon proficiency
• Light and Medium armor proficiency, proficient with shields
• The ability to disable traps like a rogue.
• An exceptional talent for creating permanent magic items.
• The ability to create temporary magic items using infusions. This system had some similarities to spellcasting. The basic list of infusion effects was very limited, focusing on effects to enhance the abilities and equipment of the artificer and allies and the ability to disable or repair constructs and objects… and the unique abilities I mentioned before.
• Many of the artificer’s most useful and versatile infusions had a base casting time of 1 minute; this could be reduced to 1 round by burning an action point."

The first three options are easily taken care of whether we "hack" an old class or jump-start a new one.

The last one is also easily remedied. Under the core rules, one might even use inspiration instead of an action point. (Though action points would be easily re-entered if the setting of the campaign is Eberron.)

The second to last one is fussy, but not insurmountable. Because the list is so limited, a dedicated look at the Artificer infusions list (combined with some soul-searching about the new concentration rules and how not to completely break them) may yield some positive results. Maybe we'll come back to this one.

The real humdinger is lodged squarely in the middle: "an exceptional talent for creating permanent magic items." In the 3.X universe where every item had a cost that was easily referenced, the formula used to help Artificers fulfill this function as magic item factories were stable and accessible. In the 5e universe where (at best) items belong to vague categories (common, uncommon, rare, etc.) with loose price ranges attached, this becomes more cumbersome.

I think that while the most elegant solution would be to create a bard sublcass (the jack-of-all-trades feel and utility spell list seem to mesh much better than the flashy, offensive spells of a wizard or the healing-heavy, divine-tempered list of a cleric), the exceptional solution may be the preferred one here: creating (re-creating) the Artificer as a new 5e base class.

If we model the Artificer on its 3e counterpart and simply update to to 5e, we can probably find a clear track to make it happen.

A look at the first level reveals the following:

• Artificer Knowledge was a great way for Artificers to have (what would now be) the Detect Magic ritual: (no spell slots required, but it also couldn't be done in a round). I think we can replace this with something similar:
• Ritual Caster: You have a "ritual tome" which mimics a wizard's spellbook with several key differences. You may only scribe new spells into it that have the ritual tag. These spells must be scribed from scrolls containing the spell (they are not learned from any other means). Even another Artificer's ritual tome cannot be used to gain additional rituals. Artificer ritual tomes use unique codes and cyphers to explain the way to mimic a spell in the idiosyncratic science of artifice, and is therefore uniquely useful only to the Artificer who scribed it. The artificer may scribe spells from any list (provided that they contain the ritual tag). When casting rituals from the ritual tome, the spell takes roughly twice as long as a normal ritual (i.e. initial casting time, plus twenty minutes). This additional time represents the difference between an active spellcaster manipulating arcane/divine energies to cast a spell and the artificers tinkered, ad hoc mimicry of those same energies. At first level, your ritual tome starts with Detect Magic scribed into it.
•  Craft Reserve was absolutely the way that Artificers were able to create any magic items without immediately falling behind the rest of their party in experience points. In a post-formula magic item creation environment, the role of this feature is less clear. More to come on this in later level discussions.
• Weapon and Armor proficiencies are a stickier wicket. Most people want to give Artificers the same proficiencies they had in 3e. That might be possible, but I suspect that they're going to have a lot going for them already. To counteract this, I'm going to start by proposing that Artificers are proficient with light armor and shields (but not medium armor), and all simple weapons. Racial backgrounds or multiclassing can still pick up some slack here for those who desperately desire the slightly heavier armor, but the base class will be that much less overpowered.
• Artisan Bonus is another throwback. Perhaps it can be combined with another former ability?
• Disable Trap would make a fine admixture.
• Tools: Artificers are proficient in thieves tools and one artisan's tool set of their choice.
• Infusions can possibly work the same way they do in 3e, with some adjustments for concentration rules and (of course) the actual porting of the infusions into 5e.

What are your own thoughts on this conundrum? Feel free to toss in a comment if you have something constructive to add! Look forward to Part 2 for how my 5e Artificer class shapes up in levels beyond the 1st.

D&D 5e: Players Rule (or: Players' Rules), Part 4

Spellcasting.

Magic (and the way it works) is one of the draws of playing a game like D&D. Many previous editions use what is apparently called the Vancian model (I hadn't heard this until recently--who knew?). The major features Vancian magic define certain attributes of spellcasting: specific, named, prepared spells. Those spells are stored and then expended as they are cast. The fifth edition rules are a variant of this model. I'm going to focus initially on the Wizard (and by extension Sorcerer), but that's at least a slight injustice since the Warlock is once again a Player's Handbook-featured class. I may need to examine the Warlock's spellcasting in a separate post.

Some overall notes to provide structure to the rest of this entry:

• (1) Spells are prepared, but this is different from having each prepared spell fill a spell slot (as a Wizard in 3e).
• (2) Spell slots are conceived as a measure of how many spells you can cast and at what power levels (during a game day or between long rests). Spells are once again based on a nine tier system.
• (3) The Player's Handbook's individual spell entries do not identify spells by class; each class has a discrete list. This doesn't actually change how the game works, but it does change how we're supposed to perceive spells.
• (4) The "pieces" of a spell (I can't use the more apt word, components, for obvious reasons) remain very much the same as in previous editions: Somatic, Verbal, Material, and/or Focus. There are, however, some re-conceptions as to how material and focus components can interact.

1) As someone who "grew up" on 3e's Sorcerer/Wizard dichotomy, I have a slight hesitation making the adjustment to 5e intuitively. For this examination, "Sorcerers" are all classes that cast spells like the basic Sorcerer 3e class, most notably the actual Sorcerers; "Wizards" are all classes that cast spells in a way that resembles the Wizard, most notably the Wizard himself. The Sorcerer/Wizard 3e dichotomy goes something like this:

• Sorcerers know spells. A known spell is not able to be changed on-the-fly, during a short rest, or during a long rest. It is, for all intents and purposes, a permanently locked-in spell. Wizards prepare spells. A prepared spell fills a spell slot and exists only until it is cast. At that moment it is removed from the Wizard's mind completely and must be re-prepared in order to be cast again. Thus, Sorcerers have access to fewer spells, but know them all the time; Wizards have access to more flexibility, but can only cast them under limited circumstances.
• Sorcerers cast more spells per day per spell-level.
• Wizards have more of a variety of spells. 
• Sorcerers--because they know spells--apply metamagic on the fly; Wizards--because they prepare ahead of time--prepare metamagic ahead of time (only) too.

Wizard on the left? Sorcerer on the right?

Bottom line: Sorcerers knew less but cast more, having more in-the-moment flexibility. Wizards knew more but cast less, having more preparatory flexibility. Sorcerers are Superman; Wizards are Batman. Superman Sorcerers can endure longer and do more with less preparation. Batman Wizards are unstoppable if given enough foreknowledge, but can run out of juice quickly when caught unprepared. Each can do something the other can't.

Back to 5e where the dichotomy continues (nomenclature officially changes back to the Sorcerers and Wizards of 5e):

• Wizards still prepare spells; Sorcerers still know them. Wizards gain some advantage here in that they no longer prepare spells that fill spell slots ahead of time (giving them additional flexibility in how often each of the prepare spells is cast and in which ones are or are not cast). Point for the Wizard.
• Comparing total spell slots gets a little tricky because Sorcerers get the new "Sorcery Points mechanic." A first level Sorcerer gets 2 first level spell slots; a first level Wizard gets 2 as well. So far so good. A fifth level Sorcerer gets a 4/3/2 progression, and so do Wizards. The difference is that a Sorcerer also gets 5 points; these could be used to grant an extra 1st and 2nd level slot (or one extra third level). Advantage: Sorcerer. At 13th level, the progression remains the same, but once again the Sorcerer has 13 points--advantage is considerable for the Sorcerer. Basically, at each level the progression remains the same but the Sorcerer (through Sorcery Points) has the option of casting additional spells. Point for the Sorcerer.
• Sorcerers are still deeply limited in spells known. A wizard who never learned a spell from a scroll could still have access to 44 spells at 20th level. A Sorcerer has a meager 15. Point for the Wizard.
• Sorcerers are now the metamagic kings. With the removal of feats, metamagic has become a class feature for the Sorcerer; Wizards need not apply (although some of the Wizard schools have their own metamagic-y class features). Point for the Sorcerer.

Each side has been tweaked to both off-set weaknesses and bolster strengths, but the Superman-Batman comparison remains.

As a final note on the dichotomy, the very number of spells a Sorcerer can draw from takes a huge hit (considering that in 3e the Wizard/Sorcerer lists were identical). Wizards still get the most spells to choose from, but now Sorcerers drop to a distant third-most (I know I read this somewhere, but I'm having trouble finding the reference. Apologies if this break down of spells-by-class is off! I don't feel like tallying everything up myself at this late stage). I was originally very alarmed at this, but the way that staffs, wands, and magic items in general have been adjusted to allow "anyone" to attune and use it, I think it will work out acceptably well. A Sorcerer isn't going to want the hyper-specific spells from a Wizard's list--and because of the metamagic shouldn't need them all anyway. By culling the list, I (hope) the developers simply made it harder for a Sorcerer to choose her spells poorly.

2) Using spell slots in the "loose" rather than "strict" way allows for them to be a much more accurate measure of power level of respective spellcasters. Someone who can cast 6 first level spells is clearly at an advantage over someone who can only cast 3. In third edition, a Wizard may have those 6 spells all as Magic Missile or they might all be Identify. By jettisoning the "strict" ideas, Wizard (and Cleric) players no longer have to have a million pages of various spells prepared in various slots. One or two lists of prepared spells (maybe one for dungeon crawling and one for urban exploring, for example) should be all that's needed. Spells can be raised into higher level slots for greater effectiveness "on the fly," and those pesky only-in-the-right-moment spells seem less wasteful to prepare. (How many of us have prepared Knock as one of our spell slots, only to find that we really needed that extra Magic Missile? Or, conversely, have an arsenal of attack spells, but didn't prepare Knock today because you knew you needed the firepower and didn't want to sell yourself short? Or even--heaven forbid--you intelligently prepared Knock and then need to open a second door.) I think this is an excellent choice.

Yes, I know Gandalf's wizardry doesn't apply here--just go with it.

Similarly, the nine-tier system is (at this point) both intuitive and useful. The difference between spell circles/levels has been refined so that there are very few spells that seem "out of position." Raise Dead feels like a fifth level spell, while Wish feels like a ninth. This was another good (if tacit) choice.

3) As someone who hasn't played a PC in a traditional D&D campaign in over a decade, I find it hard to give an honest appraisal of the way the Player's Handbook lists its spells. As a DM, I miss the old-style entries from 3e where each spell listed which class lists it could be found on. This was great for me to keep track of who was capable of what. Back when I was a player, it also let me leisurely stroll through the spells and get useful information about individual spells. As I leafed through, I could see who had highly unique spells (Druids, Paladins), who had spells that almost everyone got--eventually (Clerics). I could decide how I wanted to advance as a character by looking at the spells individually and deciding which course to take to gain access to a particular spell or three. In 5e, that mechanic seems to be swept under the rug (or perhaps remaining there from 4e). Now, you are encouraged to commit to a class and then seek out spells based on the list provided. Less aimless wandering, more committed referencing. If I consider the design implications of this, it seems like this choice may have been made to encourage players to focus on their character's progression in a straightforward way, moving away from the ability/spell/feat creep that has spawns the unbelievable number of options in Pathfinder. In the place of a player, I might find this a bit frustrating initially, but if I were really committed to playing a particular character this kind of focus may prove useful for removing distracters. As a DM, I still miss the old open-ended method which allowed me to corroborate across classes more easily. In all likelihood this is still a good choice.

4) Spell components have always been a source of confusion for me. DM David addressed this issue in some detail already, so I won't repeat his excellent thoughts and development on this issue. What I will do is summarize how I plan to handle this issue in my own game(s):

• Material components are necessary.
• Exception: You may use a Focus in place of material components.
• Exception: If the material components would cost more than 1gp, and you don't possess them, you must have the requisite moneys on hand. Upon casting the spell, the value of the components is transmuted from your possession into oblivion.
•  Exception: If the component is incredibly rare or circumstantially valuable, the DM may rule that the actual component must be present even if you have a Focus and/or have the (accurate) amount of wealth available.
• Somatic components are necessary.

• Clarification: A free hand shall be re-defined as "a hand not being used to grasp/manipulate an object." In other words, a character wielding a two-handed staff or sword must let go (with one hand), but a character wielding a weapon and shield could continue relatively unchanged (unless making shield attacks).
• Verbal components are necessary.
• Most players will not pay attention to what components a spell actually requires. Establishing a "normal" stance for each player will eliminate 99% of the confusion. (That is, talk to each player about how their character is fighting/exploring: what do they have in their hands? If they need to be adjusted in order to cast spells during combat/exploration, make the adjustment and explain why.)
• Clarification: Greater scrutiny will come into play when characters are hostages/captives or simply don't have normal access to their gear.

That's more than enough for this entry! Feel free to comment below if you managed to slog through the ramblings above. Happy 'casting.

D&D 5e: Magic Items

Magic items are a strange beast in 5e. Because of the whole bounded accuracy dynamic, there isn't a need for magical arms, armor, or gizmos in order to be appropriately powerful at a given level. I am already seeing how this change is playing out in the treasure being portioned: it lowers the amount of magical treasure significantly. In 3e, martial characters looked for that +1 longsword as soon as they started a campaign. Once they had it, it was time to look for a +2 longsword, and so on. Finding each tier of magical item (all the way up to the +5 bonus) was partly a form of "keeping up with the Baggins" and partly a way to measure the success of the party/character. The better armed and armored your character was, the more successful you were as a player. This dynamic is fundamentally shifted once magic items become useful, somewhat privileged, and not required.

As with many other changes from previous editions, this should not hit new players particularly hard. In fact, the idea that a magic item is now something precious and special should make each individual magic-item-find that much more exciting. I think it will feel much more like Lord of the Rings and less like it used to in 3e.

A low-magic Forgotten Realms universe is a strange thing to contemplate for me, but not a completely awkward one. I am going to be very interested indeed to see how Keith Baker's Eberron setting comes to pass in 5e. (His comments on his own webpage suggest that in the high-magic third edition, Warforged were overpowered. His thoughts on their redesign bring that power-creep down significantly.)

The place where the magic item dearth shows up most prominently is in the published adventure paths beyond Lost Mine of Phandelver: the Tyranny of Dragons adventure path(s). The designers, working with unfinished treasure rules, placed almost no magic items into the adventures. And really, until the Dungeon Master's Guide is released, we peons who are making do with the Player's Handbook and Monster Manual are going to find it hard to compensate appropriately. For right now, I'm planning to run the adventures without adjusting the treasure amounts, though I know it will seem somewhat low.

Maybe the biggest change in magic items (from 3e-4e) is in the fact that they're (at the time I'm writing this) no longer associated with a gold value. This one really didn't sink in until I started re-reading the magic item descriptions in the published adventures: gems and art objects are given "sell" values in gold, but magic items are just...magic items (with a few notable exceptions). Apparently, since magic (or physical manifestations of magic) is/are far less common than they were in previous editions, there are no "magic item stores." Some are even postulating that heroes will have little to spend their hard-earned gold on since they won't be able to go into larger cities and buy new magical equipment with it.

I must admit that the lack of pricing certainly sends up red flags for me. If there is no economy for magical items, that makes each one an anomaly or a priceless artifact--and I don't think that's strictly true. Potions of healing are, for better or worse, a staple of the economy and have a set price value in the Player's Handbook relative to other non-magical gear. Why shouldn't other magical items have the same treatment? The values could certainly be exaggerated for the commissioning or purchasing of such items--and the return for selling them on the open market could be lowered to reflect the uncertainty of finding a buyer--but to ignore that altogether would be a mistake.

Heroes will always find something to spend their cash on (fortresses? servants? charity? non-magical assistance?), but magic items--and the economy thereof--have been such an important part of the game for so many years that I will be hard pressed to move my players (and me!) to the new normal.