3
\$\begingroup\$

Artificers in 3.5 cast infusions, this is neither arcane nor divine. Yet they create magical effects. Artificers gain infusions just like a spell caster, and cast infusions in a manner just like sorcerers do.

Knowing this information wouldn't it follow logically that artificers, like spellcasters, can create new spells in much the same way?

\$\endgroup\$
7
\$\begingroup\$

Infusions are spells, and there are suggestions that new spells can be designed. Those suggestions were printed in Core, and not reprinted for each new spellcasting class (including artificer) was printed, but if, say, a favored soul or wu jen can research a new spell, then so too should an artificer be able to.

Of course, the real trick is convincing the DM that any particular invented spell is a good inclusion to the game. In practice, the suggestions that spellcasters can design new spells are rarely actually used—in most games, the DM is the arbiter of the allowed material, and the existence of that suggestion means nothing. If a player wants to add something to the game, no matter what it is, they can bring it up with the DM, but the DM is going to choose and usually won’t take the existence or absence of a statement like what you see for spells into consideration.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Good to know. My DM is a big fan of customization and while he of course wouldn't allow an artificer to create so many spells he's basically a wizard he quit be fine with new spells of similar but alternative designs from the artificers infusion list. I think we both agree that if you're trying to turn an artificer into a wizard it would be cheaper to be a crafting wizard \$\endgroup\$ – Zakier Jun 23 '16 at 22:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Zakier You have asked a couple of questions about these kinds of customization/research blurbs. They’re basically meaningless and no one pays them any attention. The people sitting around the table can customize the game any way they agree to (and, of course, the DM has a lot more “vote” since he’ll have to be the one running things under the new rules). What the books do or don’t say about any given customization should be taken as a suggestion if even that. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Jun 23 '16 at 23:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ Do you have a reference for that "Infusions are spells" thing? \$\endgroup\$ – GMJoe Jun 24 '16 at 3:51
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @GMJoe “[Infusions] function just like spells and follow all the rules for spells,” Eberron Campaign Setting pg. 31. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Jun 24 '16 at 4:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ Of course final decision is his to make. But if by raw something simply can't be done then why bother trying? Not to mention I can't exactly ask the dm currently. He was in a car accident so I'm not going to bother him with rules clarification. Along side that I co GM with him and this is a new class for both of us. Neither of us know it's capabilities \$\endgroup\$ – Zakier Jun 24 '16 at 14:26
2
\$\begingroup\$

I found the answer in Magic of Ebberon page 10

LEARNING NEW INFUSIONS Infusions are neither arcane nor divine, but these spell-like rites are central to artifi ce magic. Using infusions, an artifi cer can imbue an item or construct with special qualities and abilities. Many artificers throughout Eberron have continued to evolve their infusions. They might create entirely new infusions or find an ancient schema with instructions on a new magical technique. The infusions in this book represent a small portion of the widely varying infusions in use.

\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.