PDA

View Full Version : Artificers: Is WotC stupid, or am I the idiot?



Calemyr
2008-05-05, 01:27 PM
First off, I love the concept of the artificer class. However, there seems to be a very glaring oversight that I cannot seem to work my mind around:

The major bonus of reaching level 4 as an artificer is the ability to craft homunculi. There's just one catch, and that's the fact that they still need to emulate the spells to pull it off. The core spell for a homunculus, the spell that is in every variant I've seen, is Arcane Eye, which is level 4.

An artificer can emulate spells as if they were two levels higher. This doesn't make their spells stronger, but it does give them access to spell levels faster. However, the earliest anyone can cast Arcane Eye is at level 7 as a wizard, which means an artificer can emulate it at level 5. That means that they give you the Craft Homunculus class feature a full level before the earliest you can use it.

Am I reading the rules wrong? Was there an errata I missed? Or is that really as dumb as it seems to me?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-05-05, 01:41 PM
You do not have to cast the spell yourself.

You can get access through magic items or other spellcasters.

The MM also lists level 4 as the required level.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-05-05, 01:42 PM
Arcane Eye may appear on another class' spell list at a lower level, but I see no reason why you would assume WotC wasn't that dumb. They seem to enjoy printing errata, to the point whee it is necessary just to make the game playable. :smallfurious:

Solo
2008-05-05, 01:42 PM
WotC farked up.

Telonius
2008-05-05, 01:46 PM
Unless I'm wrong (and I am away from the books), there's no specific limit on the spell level you can emulate through UMD. The only limit is how well you roll. At level 4, you should have seven ranks in UMD. Chip in for some masterwork tools, or UMD-increasing item if you really need it, and you should be fine.

Tengu
2008-05-05, 02:00 PM
Arcane Eye may appear on another class' spell list at a lower level, but I see no reason why you would assume WotC wasn't that dumb. They seem to enjoy printing errata, to the point whee it is necessary just to make the game playable. :smallfurious:

I'd like to second this notion.

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-05-05, 02:05 PM
Arcane Eye is a first level spell for a Trapsmith. Have fun with your Homoculus.

shadow_archmagi
2008-05-05, 02:06 PM
Unless I'm wrong (and I am away from the books), there's no specific limit on the spell level you can emulate through UMD. The only limit is how well you roll. At level 4, you should have seven ranks in UMD. Chip in for some masterwork tools, or UMD-increasing item if you really need it, and you should be fine.

That was my interpretation as well.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-05-05, 02:09 PM
Unless I'm wrong (and I am away from the books), there's no specific limit on the spell level you can emulate through UMD. The only limit is how well you roll. At level 4, you should have seven ranks in UMD. Chip in for some masterwork tools, or UMD-increasing item if you really need it, and you should be fine.You can emulate a higher caster level, but not a spell level of more than one above what you would be able to cast.

Yes, terminology needs to be refined in all D&D products. Add that to the list of common sense things that WotC will never do.

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-05, 02:09 PM
Arcane Eye is a first level spell for a Trapsmith. Have fun with your Homoculus.

Aah, trapsmith, trapsmith, how I do adore your random and game-threateningly levelled spells.

<3

Calemyr
2008-05-05, 02:15 PM
That's a prestige class, though. Can artificers use prestige class spell lists?

Illiterate Scribe
2008-05-05, 02:19 PM
That's a prestige class, though. Can artificers use prestige class spell lists?

Yup, thus posing a major problem. It's any spell list.

SamTheCleric
2008-05-05, 02:22 PM
Gotta love Haste as a first level spell.

ArmorArmadillo
2008-05-05, 02:25 PM
You do not have to cast the spell yourself.

You can get access through magic items or other spellcasters.

The MM also lists level 4 as the required level.

Did you all miss this post? It seems to explain the whole thing very clearly.

Telonius
2008-05-05, 02:39 PM
Very clearly, unless you are unable to obtain it through magic items or other spellcasters.

Calemyr
2008-05-05, 03:40 PM
That's a good bit of it, I'm afraid. scrolls of Arcane Eye are not a common find in random loot, if I've got a level 7 wizard in my party and stuck at level 4 I've got more problems than crafting homunculi, and hiring a level 7 caster to cast a level 4 spell is rather expensive for a level 4 character, even if he has the resources to find one, especially after you count the expense of creating the homunculus.

That said, the use of presitge class spell lists seems somewhat dirty pool to me, which leaves me stuck where I started.

DementedFellow
2008-05-05, 03:57 PM
That's a good bit of it, I'm afraid. scrolls of Arcane Eye are not a common find in random loot, if I've got a level 7 wizard in my party and stuck at level 4 I've got more problems than crafting homunculi, and hiring a level 7 caster to cast a level 4 spell is rather expensive for a level 4 character, even if he has the resources to find one, especially after you count the expense of creating the homunculus.

That said, the use of presitge class spell lists seems somewhat dirty pool to me, which leaves me stuck where I started.

Just offer the wizard something to be made via your new homunculus. Offer to sell it to him at the cost it takes to make it. Chances are you'll sooner or later have the feat that will reduce the cost, so you can still make out with a profit, albeit a small one. No one will turn down a low-level magic item at half cost for the simple task of waving your hands and saying a few words.

Flickerdart
2008-05-05, 04:01 PM
Set up a homuculus mass-production venture and split profits 50/50.

By the way, which book is the Artificer in?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-05-05, 04:04 PM
By the way, which book is the Artificer in?

Eberron Camapign Setting.

Reel On, Love
2008-05-05, 04:05 PM
That's a good bit of it, I'm afraid. scrolls of Arcane Eye are not a common find in random loot, if I've got a level 7 wizard in my party and stuck at level 4 I've got more problems than crafting homunculi, and hiring a level 7 caster to cast a level 4 spell is rather expensive for a level 4 character, even if he has the resources to find one, especially after you count the expense of creating the homunculus.

That said, the use of presitge class spell lists seems somewhat dirty pool to me, which leaves me stuck where I started.

Hiring a level 7 caster to cast a single level 4 spell costs 40 * 7 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm#spellcastingAndServices) = 280 gp. That's not bad at all.

Aleron
2008-05-05, 04:06 PM
Just offer the wizard something to be made via your new homunculus. Offer to sell it to him at the cost it takes to make it. Chances are you'll sooner or later have the feat that will reduce the cost, so you can still make out with a profit, albeit a small one. No one will turn down a low-level magic item at half cost for the simple task of waving your hands and saying a few words.

Problem is that, if I'm not mistaken, a homunclus can't actually be sold. Says so in the description I believe.

And flickerdart, they're in the Eberon Campaign Setting book

Aleron
2008-05-05, 04:07 PM
Hiring a level 7 caster to cast a single level 4 spell costs 40 * 7 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm#spellcastingAndServices) = 280 gp. That's not bad at all.

Assuming your DM is nice and doesn't have the wizard charge you extra. I Know mine would :(

DementedFellow
2008-05-05, 04:08 PM
no, I'm not saying you sell the homunculi, you sell the first thing he makes to the helpful spellcaster. So basically, "Hey bud, cast this spell for me and I'll make you a bag of tricks and charge you half market value."

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-05-05, 04:37 PM
Assuming your DM is nice and doesn't have the wizard charge you extra. I Know mine would :(

Yeah, my DM always charges 4 billion times the cost of PHB items and services.

All fighters use Quarterstaffs, since they can't afford any other item until Epic.

Oh wait, DMs arbitrarily changing the costs to spite a class's main unique feature is retarded and people don't do it.

Far more likely that a decent DM would give you a discount on the cost of the spell so that you can have your Class feature.

Of course, as one person already said, you can emulate a 9th level spell with a level 1 Artificer for crafting, as long as you can make the UMD check.

Aquillion
2008-05-05, 05:39 PM
Oh wait, DMs arbitrarily changing the costs to spite a class's main unique feature is retarded and people don't do it.To be fair, this is the artificer. It's not as though they're going to be crippled by not having a homunculus for one level. It'd still annoy me, though.


Of course, as one person already said, you can emulate a 9th level spell with a level 1 Artificer for crafting, as long as you can make the UMD check.Nope. Artificers mimick spells using their artificer level + 2 for their caster level, and can't mimick a spell with a caster level too low to cast it; your Artificer level must be at least twice the spell's level, -3.

Jack Mann
2008-05-05, 08:03 PM
Yeah, my DM always charges 4 billion times the cost of PHB items and services.

All fighters use Quarterstaffs, since they can't afford any other item until Epic.

Oh wait, DMs arbitrarily changing the costs to spite a class's main unique feature is retarded and people don't do it.

Well, to be fair, some people do. But yeah, they're generally morons for doing so.

Aleron
2008-05-05, 09:10 PM
Yeah, my DM always charges 4 billion times the cost of PHB items and services.

All fighters use Quarterstaffs, since they can't afford any other item until Epic.

Oh wait, DMs arbitrarily changing the costs to spite a class's main unique feature is retarded and people don't do it.

Far more likely that a decent DM would give you a discount on the cost of the spell so that you can have your Class feature.

Of course, as one person already said, you can emulate a 9th level spell with a level 1 Artificer for crafting, as long as you can make the UMD check.

... ... ...Wow...over react much? I said charge MORE than standard, not make the cost impossible to handle, shesh.

Calemyr
2008-05-06, 09:21 AM
Well, my DM decided to just make Arcane Eye a level 3 spell after finding that nobody had a "good" way of dealing with it. Smart move, if you ask me, because that solves the issue simply and without opening the door on some of the more dangerous solutions like allowing prestige class spell lists.

hamishspence
2008-05-06, 10:02 AM
Same problem applies to the crusader: because they get their last stance at 14th level (and apparently they MUST choose a stance when it becomes available) a single class crusader cannot access 8th level stances, not even from the crusader-only Devoted Spirit school, without choosing feats.

Definitely makes one think someone hasn't done their proofreading well. A case for little adjustments: maybe delaying access to the last stance, since it LOOKS like weakening the crusader through earlier levels, but actually gives them access to the ability they should have access to, without them having to spend their feats on their own stances.

How common are things that look like obvious bugs in the class design?

Calemyr
2008-05-06, 10:33 AM
Well, if it comes to that, I still don't like how they deal with upgrading homunculi in the first place. 4k per hit die? Yeah, that might be trivial in high level situations, but that's crippling at early levels where the homunculi are actually useful tools.

sikyon
2008-05-06, 11:52 AM
Arcane Eye is a first level spell for a Trapsmith. Have fun with your Homoculus.

Why is this thread even still going on?

Telonius
2008-05-06, 11:59 AM
Perhaps because not all DMs allow Dungeonscape. Honestly, a thread is not "over" if the only solution involves a splatbook, even if our beloved Giant is an author.

Emperor Tippy
2008-05-06, 01:09 PM
Perhaps because not all DMs allow Dungeonscape. Honestly, a thread is not "over" if the only solution involves a splatbook, even if our beloved Giant is an author.

Actually it pretty much is. The OP did not ban or specify any books, which means that all 3.5 books are assumed as being in play. The OP has not said Dungeonscape isn't in play since then either. And the Giant being and author of it is really irrelevant.

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-05-06, 01:10 PM
Smart move, if you ask me, because that solves the issue simply and without opening the door on some of the more dangerous solutions like allowing prestige class spell lists.

Why are assumed facets of the class dangerous.

Artificers can make scrolls from any list, that's why they are artificers. The only three classes that might actually become a problem for are Assassin, Blackguard, and Trapsmith.

And between Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Paladin/Ranger/Bard, you kow, those core base classes, there aren't many spells you can get at a lower level. Pretty much just the Trapsmith ones and a few of the Assassin/Blackguard ones.

Why does everyone complain about the ability to use classes actual class features?

Calemyr
2008-05-06, 01:49 PM
You're right, these spell lists do not add NEW spells to the game, but that's something of the point. The only reason you would use prestige class spell lists is to get them earlier than intended, and unintended consequences like having access to Fabricate at level 3 is more than a little game breaking. Especially since the class ability never establishes that it includes prestige class spell lists and calculating caster level through them is tricky, since even the trapsmith requires five levels beforehand.

Also, the reason threads like this go on after the "ultimate" answer is because the "ultimate" answer is rarely the only one and even more rarely the unquestionably legal one, meaning that other answers and opinions are not instantly invalidated. This is a forum (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/forum), after all, not a courtroom. And yes, I am aware of the inherrent irony of that statement.

Cuddly
2008-05-06, 02:11 PM
Why does everyone complain about the ability to use classes actual class features?

Because some class features are flat better than other class features.

Aleron
2008-05-06, 02:25 PM
Because some class features are flat better than other class features.

http://http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/128320993454987500dudewaitw.jpg

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-05-06, 05:12 PM
You're right, these spell lists do not add NEW spells to the game, but that's something of the point. The only reason you would use prestige class spell lists is to get them earlier than intended, and unintended consequences like having access to Fabricate at level 3 is more than a little game breaking. Especially since the class ability never establishes that it includes prestige class spell lists and calculating caster level through them is tricky, since even the trapsmith requires five levels beforehand.

This is precisely my point. One PrC in the entire game gets spells at a lower level then they can be achieved by base classes. Why on earth make a big deal about "PrC spellcasting" when it is literally one single class?

Secondly, it is very very very clear that the Artificers can mimic spells from PrC lists, because he can mimic any item in the game, period. He can make a scroll of a Chameleon level 2 spell, or a trapsmith level 1 spell, or a Ranger level 4 spell because he can make any item that can be made, and since all of those classes can take scribe scroll and make a scroll, so can he.

Nor is calculating CL difficult, since any PrC with a separate list with the exception of Ur-Priest and Sublime Chord (who both cast off of base class lists anyway) has it's own independent CL. It doesn't matter if you are a Wizard 15/Trapsmith 5 or a Rogue 5/Trapsmith 5, you have the same CL.

sikyon
2008-05-06, 06:31 PM
Also, the reason threads like this go on after the "ultimate" answer is because the "ultimate" answer is rarely the only one and even more rarely the unquestionably legal one, meaning that other answers and opinions are not instantly invalidated. This is a forum (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/forum), after all, not a courtroom. And yes, I am aware of the inherrent irony of that statement.


Perhaps because not all DMs allow Dungeonscape. Honestly, a thread is not "over" if the only solution involves a splatbook, even if our beloved Giant is an author.

The OP asked a question, we answered it explicitly. To me it seems that anything beyond that is really off-topic.

However, what really irritates me is that people say things like


Same problem applies to the crusader: because they get their last stance at 14th level (and apparently they MUST choose a stance when it becomes available) a single class crusader cannot access 8th level stances, not even from the crusader-only Devoted Spirit school, without choosing feats.

Definitely makes one think someone hasn't done their proofreading well. A case for little adjustments: maybe delaying access to the last stance, since it LOOKS like weakening the crusader through earlier levels, but actually gives them access to the ability they should have access to, without them having to spend their feats on their own stances.

How common are things that look like obvious bugs in the class design?


To be fair, this is the artificer. It's not as though they're going to be crippled by not having a homunculus for one level. It'd still annoy me, though.

and seem to believe that it's not possible, when nobody has explicitly denied the use of the trapsmith.

So to conclude, the artificer was not designed incorrectly, they made no mistake. It's fine as written. If you are interested in not using splatbooks, then you're home ruling disabling his class features.

Calemyr
2008-05-06, 08:38 PM
Actually, it explicitly states that an artificer cannot emulate feats or skills. It wouldn't be hard to image a DM claiming that, to use a Prestige Class Spell List, you'd need to first have all the skills, feats, and special prereqs before you can cast the spell from it. Also, there is no reason *to* allow Prestige Class Spell Lists other than to give the artificer spells far faster than they were ever meant to. As I already stated, Fabrication at character level 3 is EXTREMELY broken. Really, honestly, and truly. I would love to take advantage of that, and I am somewhat embarassed to be arguing against my own case, but I simply can't bring myself to exploit oversights in the rules like that. Broken rules should be fixed no matter who they favor.

Also, using one obscure prestige class from one obscure splat book and using what is either unsound logic or a very generous reading of the rules to apply it to the problem does not mean the problem does not exist. It was an error in the book that was never addressed in the errata and rarely comes up because nobody bothers to research the spells they'll be using in crafting.

Either way, all of this is trumped by Rule One, anyway: The DM is god. Arcane Eye is now house-ruled as a level 3 spell. No muss, no PrC fuss.

sikyon
2008-05-06, 09:45 PM
Actually, it explicitly states that an artificer cannot emulate feats or skills. It wouldn't be hard to image a DM claiming that, to use a Prestige Class Spell List, you'd need to first have all the skills, feats, and special prereqs before you can cast the spell from it. Also, there is no reason *to* allow Prestige Class Spell Lists other than to give the artificer spells far faster than they were ever meant to. As I already stated, Fabrication at character level 3 is EXTREMELY broken. Really, honestly, and truly. I would love to take advantage of that, and I am somewhat embarassed to be arguing against my own case, but I simply can't bring myself to exploit oversights in the rules like that. Broken rules should be fixed no matter who they favor.

Either way, all of this is trumped by Rule One, anyway: The DM is god. Arcane Eye is now house-ruled as a level 3 spell. No muss, no PrC fuss.

Most DM's will apply houserules, but this doesn't change RAW.




Also, using one obscure prestige class from one obscure splat book and using what is either unsound logic or a very generous reading of the rules to apply it to the problem does not mean the problem does not exist. It was an error in the book that was never addressed in the errata and rarely comes up because nobody bothers to research the spells they'll be using in crafting.


How is it unsound logic or a very generous reading of hte rules? The rules say they can use any spell list. This is a broad, encompassing statement and therefore applies to all spell lists. You don't need to be a wizard to use a wizard spell list. You don't need to be a prestige class to use the prestige class spell list. Pretty simple. Prestige classes are just that, classes.

You, my friend, are the one on thin logic.

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-05-06, 10:24 PM
Also, there is no reason *to* allow Prestige Class Spell Lists other than to give the artificer spells far faster than they were ever meant to.

1) Name a single PrC that gives spells faster then a base class other then Trapsmith, the one I told you about. Go ahead.

Stop making blanket claims that "PrC spell lists are teh broken!" based on one class.

2) Fabricate at any level is broken, because it gives you infinite wealth, which means you can go around buying +50 items at level 10. Welcome to D&D.

Collin152
2008-05-06, 10:29 PM
1) Name a single PrC that gives spells faster then a base class other then Trapsmith, the one I told you about. Go ahead.

As in, at lower spell levels?
Cause I think Ur Priest is a canidate as you've stated the conditions.

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-05-06, 10:44 PM
As in, at lower spell levels?
Cause I think Ur Priest is a canidate as you've stated the conditions.

I think gives spells [to the artificer] would be my intent. IE lower spell levels. Since Ur-Priest uses Cleric list and Chameleon uses other lists, neither of them can actually do so.

Calemyr
2008-05-06, 11:18 PM
Okay, lets start with where it says "any spell list". I see "An artificer can create a magic item even if he does not have access to the spells that are prerequisites for the item". There is no reference to using "any spell list", and no suggestion that Prestige Class Spell Lists are viable. I mean, they're "Prestige" for a reason, aren't they? With features inimitable by base classes?

If you can point out even the slightest hint that you can use Prestige Class Spell Lists beyond that one sentence ("An artificer can create a magic item even if he does not have access to the spells that are prerequisites for the item."), which I do not see including non-standard spell lists, I will humbly accept that I am, in fact, an Idiot and then cheerfully march to my next session to write up many scrolls of Fabricate for future use.

Cuddly
2008-05-06, 11:27 PM
It's right there in the description!
"An artificer can create a magic item even if he does not have access to the spells that are prerequisites for the item".
Artificer isn't in a particular PrC, and doesn't have the spells. BUT!
"An artificer can create a magic item even if he does not have access to the spells that are prerequisites for the item"

Calemyr
2008-05-06, 11:54 PM
Scrubbed.

"An artificer can create a magic item even if he does not have access to the spells that are prerequisites for the item" only gives you access to every spell, not every spell list. As has been pointed out, every spell is available to SOME base class. There is no justification for the claim based on this sentence.

Cuddly
2008-05-06, 11:58 PM
Having access to a spell list is a prerequisite of casting that spell, is it not?

Calemyr
2008-05-07, 12:06 AM
Yes, but there is a base class that has each of those spells. There's no justification for including PrCs. They aren't needed and they aren't mentioned.

Cuddly
2008-05-07, 12:12 AM
Are the base classes mentioned?

Calemyr
2008-05-07, 12:19 AM
No, but they ARE needed for the feature to function. PrCs are not needed and only serve to add complication and confusion. The only class where this is an advantage is also the class that proves this interpretation broken.

PrCs are "Prestige", as I've already said. You don't get them by default, you don't get them for cheap. You have to work for them and commit to them, and for that work and commitment you attain the advanced ability. There is no justification to add them based on that sentence, as I have said more than once already.

Cuddly
2008-05-07, 12:29 AM
But based on that same sentence, there is also no justification to add ANY spell list, since it mentions nothing about spell lists. Simply access to spells. Nor does it clarify the issue of Hold Person; Clr2, Sor/Wiz3, or Plane Shift; Clr 5, Sor/Wiz 7. Nor does it clarify if domain spells are accessible.

Well, it does clarify- it says "An artificer can create a magic item even if he does not have access to the spells that are prerequisites for the item". Reading exactly what is written, you get access to PrC lists. You know, since making an item of Fabricate or whatever at that low level requires a spell of that level. If the spell exists, and an item can be made with it, then the item can be made by an artificer, so long as he meets any other prerequisites.

Normally you don't get the ability to emulate all spells- you don't get it by default, and you don't get it cheap. Maybe you should pick a spell list to emulate from?

Calemyr
2008-05-07, 01:02 AM
Tenacious, but still missing the point. They give demonstrations of using spells from the base class spell lists, notably a wizard's fireball. As the feature is spelled out in the book, that is how it was meant to operate. I am still interested, however, in the opinions of other posters.

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-05-07, 01:53 AM
Tenacious, but still missing the point. They give demonstrations of using spells from the base class spell lists, notably a wizard's fireball. As the feature is spelled out in the book, that is how it was meant to operate. I am still interested, however, in the opinions of other posters.

The point is that creating items is no different for PrC lists then Base lists. It gives you the ability to create items (any item in the game) without needing to cast spells. Since a Scroll of Fabricate can be made by a Trapsmith at that spell level, an Artificer can make a scroll of Fabricate at that level. It's a simple process:

1) Could any character in the game make this item?
2) If yes, so can an artificer.

PrCs are not different in their mechanics. There is nothing different from emulating a Trapsmith versus a Wizard.

In fact based on your own logic "They give examples for base classes, but not for PrCs." I could point out that every given example (all two of them) comes from the Wizard list. That would mean that Artificers can't emulate any Divine casting at all.

So no, it doesn't matter that it is a PrC. Yes Fabricate is broken at level 3. It's also broken at level 9. Wish as a Spell like ability that doesn't cost any XP to create a Staff of Wishes which also doesn't cost XP to wish up a bunch of other items including a second staff of wishes is broken at level 9 when every single Core Wizard can get access to it. But that's D&D. D&D only works if the players are nice enough to not use the infinite wealth they can get.

Hell, play elves. Put four ranks into Profession Farmer. Make Profession checks for 100 years worth of farming. Then start play at level 1 with that much wealth.

Aquillion
2008-05-07, 02:24 AM
1) Name a single PrC that gives spells faster then a base class other then Trapsmith, the one I told you about. Go ahead.Blackguard. Antipathy 6th is the big one (8th/9th level to 6th is huge). They also get finger of Death at 6th.

While not a PRC, several domains offer spells at lower levels than they would be gained outside of those domains. Generally only one level, but it matters. The Watery Death domain grants Control Water at 3 and Rushing Waters at 4. The Vile Darkness domain grants Darkvision at 2nd. The Gnome and Trickery domains grant Screen at 7th. The Time Domain grants Moment of Prescience at 7th and Foresight at 8th. And so on.

If you want to be extreme, though: Anyone can cast a 2nd level spell with CL 1 using precocious apprentice. By the logic being presented here, wouldn't that allow an artificer to mimic any 2nd level spell using CL 1, producing cut-rate items as a result?

Cuddly
2008-05-07, 03:00 AM
Darkvision is a level 2 sorc/wiz spell already.

namo
2008-05-07, 03:42 AM
PrCs : Nentyar Hunter, Runescarred Berserker - you gotta love Unapproachable East. They're not as egregious as the Trapsmith though.

Irreverent Fool
2008-05-07, 06:36 AM
Calemyr: A very simple example of the problem in determining the spell level available without doing things like even GLANCING at splatbooks is the spell 'Animate Dead'. It is a 4th-level cleric spell and a 5th-level wizard spell.

How do we determine which level it is for the purposes of the Artificer's emulation? One assumes the most advantageous version can be used. Thus, one chooses the 4th-level spell.

Since the spell exists both as a 4th and 5th level spell, we can SAY that the artificer has access to the spell lists for both classes when crafting items. There is nothing limiting the choice of class lists (read: n-level version of spells), so we MUST allow access to the PrC lists assuming those books are usable in the campaign.

The simplest solution would be to ban PrC spell lists. It wouldn't hinder the artificer in any way (except in crafting his homunculus) and it would clean things up quite a bit. But that wouldn't be RAW.

Interestingly enough, I've encountered the same sort of annoyance in using the Craft Construct feat. The feat isn't available until level 6 and yet many of the 'lesser' constructs say they require only a CL5.

PnP Fan
2008-05-07, 07:38 AM
Why does everyone complain about the ability to use classes actual class features?

Because people like to complain. It is the internet, after all.:smallwink:

Swooper
2008-05-07, 05:15 PM
When a rule is ambiguous enough to offer two or more possible interpretations, go with the one that looks least broken. Has this been coined before? Swooper's Razor has a ring to it...

In this case, to not allow the Artificer to use PrC lists. That'd be my ruling on the subject, RAW or not.

DementedFellow
2008-05-07, 05:30 PM
I offer a different idea.

Instead of saying "he get its at first level or doesn't get it at all." Why not treat it like a PrC spell list. Meaning the soonest level-wise the character can enter the PrC and get that list.

I don't have Dungeonscape so I'll just be vague. :smallwink:

Let's say we have X PrC. The first level of the PrC gives access to the spell in question. Let's say that we know you need a Hide skill of 8 and all other prerequisite skills are 8. So typically that's a 5th level character that would able to take that skill on his 6th character level.

In this manner, the Artificer could have access to the spell in question from the PrC at level 4.

Thoughts?

Chosen_of_Vecna
2008-05-07, 06:29 PM
When a rule is ambiguous enough to offer two or more possible interpretations, go with the one that looks least broken. Has this been coined before? Swooper's Razor has a ring to it...

In this case, to not allow the Artificer to use PrC lists. That'd be my ruling on the subject, RAW or not.

1) yes by a billion people who think they are super clever, but aren't.

2) The problem with that trite statement is that you can phrase it the way you did above (In which cases Artificers can only use the Wizard list and no others, or arguably no lists at all. Sorry Artificers, you can't craft.)

Or you can phrase it as "two equally valid interpretations" which leads to the fact that there is no such thing as two equally as valid interpretations, and in fact, using this case as an example, Artificers being able to use any list is actually valid, and not being able to use PrC lists is just some people who are afriad of the implications, but have no actual evidence and instead spend all their effort jumping through miraculous contortions of logic to claim that Artificers can't use PrC lists because it doesn't specifically mention PrCs (even though it doesn't specifically mention base classes either.)

SCPRedMage
2008-05-08, 01:22 PM
Blarg, I can't believe that this thread has gone on this long without someone correcting this...

The level other players get access to a spell is completely irrelevant to an Artificer. The only thing that matters is the caster level of the magic item.

A fourth level Artificer could make a magic item that requires a bloody WISH spell, so long as the caster level of the item was 6th or lower. And since the caster level requirement for Homunculi is level bloody FOUR, there's no problem here.

Calemyr
2008-05-08, 01:51 PM
That is not true, however. The example given for the feature spells that out plainly by saying that describing how an Artificer can create a scroll of fireball at level 3, because the soonest a wizard can get it is level 5. The limit is one spell level higher than normal, not the sky. You do not get to say "Ooh, I'll make a wish scroll now" just because you're good at rolling twenties on your UMD checks.

Looks like the DM of my campaign is allowing the generous interpretation, by the way. I guess he figures I'll need all the help I can get to keep up with the half-minotaur warblade...

SCPRedMage
2008-05-08, 02:05 PM
That is not true, however. The example given for the feature spells that out plainly by saying that describing how an Artificer can create a scroll of fireball at level 3, because the soonest a wizard can get it is level 5. The limit is one spell level higher than normal, not the sky. You do not get to say "Ooh, I'll make a wish scroll now" just because you're good at rolling twenties on your UMD checks.

Looks like the DM of my campaign is allowing the generous interpretation, by the way. I guess he figures I'll need all the help I can get to keep up with the half-minotaur warblade...
That's because scrolls, wands, staffs, etc, have a minimum caster level equal to the minimum level necessary to be able to cast the spell they duplicate. Since you have to be at least level 5 to cast Fireball, the minimum caster level you can normally scribe a scroll of Fireball at is level 5. Similarly, the soonest you could cast Wish would be level 17, so a scroll of Wish would normally need to be scribed with a minimum caster level of 17.

Note that we've calculated the CASTER LEVEL of the ITEM. Now the Artificer uses THAT. In other words, when creating a magic item that duplicates the effect of the spell, the level casters get access to it becomes important, because it determines the caster level of the item. HOWEVER, if you go over the DMG, the MIC, and all the countless splatbooks that introduce new items, you'll find COUNTLESS examples of magic items with caster levels lower than the level you gain access to the prerequisite spells. In those cases, you need to remember that it's the caster level of the ITEM, not the caster level you'd get the spells at, that's important.

Calemyr
2008-05-08, 03:56 PM
No, it's stated quite clearly in the DMG errata that the "minimum caster level is that which is needed to meet the prerequisites given." In other words, yes, the listed caster level isn't a requirement. It is, in fact, meant to define a default item's caster level for dispel rolls and the like. However, you DO need to be able to cast the required spells: both to be of the proper level and to have it as an accessible spell.

Artificers add two to their level to determine what spells they can emulate, which lets them use spells early. It does not give them access to everything at once. The feature was poorly written, I'll admit, but you either need to be willfully misreading it or basing your opinion on second hand opinion to draw the conclusion that level 1 artificers can attempt to craft using the Wish spell.

Aquillion
2008-05-08, 06:58 PM
No, it's stated quite clearly in the DMG errata that the "minimum caster level is that which is needed to meet the prerequisites given." In other words, yes, the listed caster level isn't a requirement. It is, in fact, meant to define a default item's caster level for dispel rolls and the like. However, you DO need to be able to cast the required spells: both to be of the proper level and to have it as an accessible spell.

Artificers add two to their level to determine what spells they can emulate, which lets them use spells early. It does not give them access to everything at once. The feature was poorly written, I'll admit, but you either need to be willfully misreading it or basing your opinion on second hand opinion to draw the conclusion that level 1 artificers can attempt to craft using the Wish spell.Don't forget, this leads to a very strange quirk:

Paladins (and some other partial casters) get 1/2 their class level for their caster level. An artificer, though, emulates an artificer's caster level using their Artificer level + 2. So they can cast Paladin spells early, and can mimic every spell available to the paladin by level 8.

On the other hand, a bard gets a full caster level, which an artificer mimicks as above. So an artificer mimicks bard spells as if they were a bard two levels higher. Note an important point here: Many people mistakenly think of the bard as getting spells like, say, an Archivist + 2 ("I'm level 9, that's enough for a cleric/wiz to get 6th level spells, therefore I can mimick a level 6 bard spell.") This is wrong. A bard needs a CL of at least 16 to cast level 6 spells, so an artificer must be level 14 to mimic them.

Now, if you want to get really silly, you could argue that because the divine bard varient exists, it an artificer can mimic the spells at the lower level because an archivist can theoretically get their hands on a bard spell from a divine bard and cast it at that CL. That's a bit twisted, though, and depends on divine bards existing (which they may not, they're an optional varient.)

Not that it matters, because most level 6 bard spells appear on other, faster lists... but it applies to any class that has a "shortened" spell list. Unlike the archivist, artificers care about CL, not spell level; they can get spells early from classes that have a reduced CL, but they can't get them early just because they happen to have a shortened spell list.