Artificer Infusions

[TheDright]

How do most people handle the learning of new artificer infusions? Do you let an artificer learn arcane spells like fireball or other heavily damaging spells?

[Gralamin]

How do most people handle the learning of new artificer infusions? Do you let an artificer learn arcane spells like fireball or other heavily damaging spells?

Why would I? Infusions are meant to enhance what is already there, or to store a spell inside. If they want to learn a new infusion, it has to fit with what an infusion is.

[TheDright]

So what it would be a good idea to have a PC not able to learn fireball as an infusion...they would have to infuse it into an object and then throw it...or would it be just too broken/complicated. The rules say they can learn new infusions, but it doesn't have an example of what those infusions would be.

[Hectonkhyres]

I see no reason why someone shouldn't be able to make fireball into an infusion. You sit down for a full minute, blow some reagents, and then have the sword you just cast it on explode in a shower of molten metal. It wouldn't be very useful and would probably end up giving you 3rd degree burns... but there isn't anything there to stop you.

It isn't the DM's job to keep you from committing suicide by infusion.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Scribe a scroll of it. Honestly, Artificers are already in the top 3 most powerful classes out there, why make them worse?

[TheDright]

Under the artificer infusions, it explains that they can learn new infusions that they come across. I was wondering what would qualify something as an infusion-like effect versus an illusion-like effect.

[TheOOB]

I absolutely refuse to give artificer's anything more then they already have. They are the most broken class in the game, they don't need anything else.

[Bag_of_Holding]

Under the artificer infusions, it explains that they can learn new infusions that they come across. I was wondering what would qualify something as an infusion-like effect versus an illusion-like effect.

Fireball is an arcane spell, not an infusion. An artificer can already craft an item that allows her to cast fireball so why would she want to use it as an infusion? If I recall correctly, the sentence about learning 'new' infusions is a way of introducing homebrew infusions to an already existing list of infusions. I think you just got that confused


p.s. an artificer's infusion per day is rather limited, too. At least not enough to cast inferior spells like fireball for sure.

[TheDright]

So artificers should NOT learn arcane spells as infusions, because it gives too much power to an already powerful class.

How would one determine if a particular effect could be learned as an infusion, or if that sort of effect would be solely be the purview of an arcane/divine spellcaster.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

I'd say, no new infusions at all. If your Artificer wants to do something, have him craft a wand of it.

[TheDright]

Thanks for the advice everyone. Will try to restrict/prohibit learning spells as infusions.

[greenknight]

Personally, I wouldn't prohibit the Artificer from learning new infusions, but if you're going to do it make sure the new infusion is appropriate to the theme of the class and won't totally disrupt your game. For example:

Animate Objects: This really fits the Artificer's theme, but it could be overpowered given everything Artificers can do with objects.

Ironwood: Another thematically appropriate spell, and I doubt it would be all that overpowering if an Artificer had it as an infusion.

Continual Flame: Not really sure why this wasn't put on the Artificer's list in the first place.

Detect Magic/Analyze Dweomer: Ok, so maybe these exact spells might be inappropriate as infusions, but something like them should be available to the class, maybe requiring a costly focus in the form of some kind of goggles or lenses.