Timeline for Can the artificer's spell-storing item store their specialist spells?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 28, 2020 at 22:16 | comment | added | RallozarX | @gto There's no need to apologize for accepting an answer of someone else. The community votes to what they agree with, and though I disagree with it this time, it only means I must be interpreting the text incorrectly. | |
| Jun 28, 2020 at 20:52 | comment | added | gto | @RallozarX I apologize for not following through and Accepting your answer, but it became clear that the subsequent dissenting reply had the community's wholehearted support. | |
| Jun 16, 2020 at 13:04 | comment | added | Guybrush McKenzie | @gto I think it’s more that the existing mechanical differences prompts this wording. Warlocks get a small, fixed selection of known spells over their career, much like bards, and can choose these expanded selection spells - they don’t get them “for free” from this feature, but can get free extra spells from invocations. The other classes that get extra spells from a subclass - including the Artificer - gain access to their entire spell list and can choose any of them to prepare, but have the additional spells “always prepared” for free, whether they’re normally on their list or not. | |
| Jun 16, 2020 at 10:23 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 8:37 | history | edited | RallozarX | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
350 characters added
|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 8:35 | comment | added | RallozarX | Probably the only mechanical difference for the Warlocks is they can choose one of those first level spells if they took the Magic Initiate feat and chose warlock as the class to choose from. Which isn't a bad idea, due to the small amount of spell slots they have. | |
| Jun 16, 2020 at 6:10 | comment | added | gto | Interesting, @RallozarX. I dug into these more at your prompting, and (by RAW) it does look like the Cleric, Druid, and Paladin subclasses' spells in the PHB are not added to their class list, while the Warlock's subclasses' are. (In addition, the new Ranger subclasses in XGtE get their own spells, too, and those match the Artificer's wording: "The spell counts as a ranger spell for you.") If you would add this to your answer, I think that would be enough to mark it "Accepted." I wonder if there's any mechanical consequence to the Warlock being different... | |
| Jun 15, 2020 at 6:07 | comment | added | RallozarX | @gto There's no subclass that uses the same wording of ERLW, but that's because for most subclasses that have extra spells (Cleric domains, Circle of Land Druids, Paladin Oaths) have a default part in the main class saying, "If you gain "a subclass" spell that doesn't appear on the [class] spell list, the spell is nonetheless a [class] spell for you." It's a styling change that I find weird in that the artificer doesn't have it said in the main class. | |
| Jun 15, 2020 at 3:18 | comment | added | gto | That's an intriguing wording difference. To prove this isn't just a style difference between the PHB and ERLW, is there another subclass in the PHB that uses the same wording that the artificers' specialties do? | |
| Jun 15, 2020 at 2:48 | history | answered | RallozarX | CC BY-SA 4.0 |