Artificer and Mage Slayer line of feats? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Artificer and Mage Slayer line of feats? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
sircedric4
04-28-07, 07:05 PM I did a Google search but could not find any information with artificers and the mage slayer line of feats from Complete Arcane so I thought I'd seek some opinions.

I am creating a warforged artificer (meleeficer), and although there are more optimum builds in the Unofficial Handbook, I was looking for something a little different. I'm keeping the Persistant Feat with a couple of buffable eternal wands, but the character I am building has a distinct dislike for mages. I'm thinking about using my regular feats to mage slay instead of heaping on the metamagic or combat feats.

My question is whether you think that the caster level hits on spells and spell like abilities mentioned in the Mage Slayer line of feats applies to my infusions, the spell trigger items and such that I use, or to the items I create when using UMD to fake spells for enchanting? If it does, obviously I'll skip it since it would majorly gimp me.

I like the notion of an artificer that feels that mages and their ilk are using "corrupt" magic since their not putting in the sweat equity to use items, and as a warforged I treating the energy for my spells as coming from within, where a mages capabilities come from without. My character is deadset against removing these "corrupters" and the mage slayer feats would make him good at it. I'm not actually playing a game now, just kicking the idea around in my head, so i don't have a DM to run the idea by, so I'm seeking some opinions.

Do you think its just cheesy, not doable due to some RAW I'm missing, or a cool little loophole that sounds like an interesting meleeficer. (my first post here so "Hi!" and go easy on me:) )
timothyx
04-28-07, 07:52 PM If you were my player. First thing I'd do. Is have you kill yourself. You're a creation of Arcane magic (based on the designs of contructs are primarilly created, but not exclusively by mages), and thus your belief in the Corupt nature of it would lead you to question your own existence (or should anyways), and thusly you would need to die.

For the Mage slayer feats, knock yourself out, makes for an interesting Artificer, however, as your DM, I'd apply them to any Arcane spells you tried make scrolls/wands/infusions from the Arcane spell lists, etc. But by RAW, it's simply that Infusions AREN'T arcane, nor are they Divine, niether are your scrolls, wands, etc, etc. So you can use them with impunity. I think it's cheese, and I'd never allow the Persistent spell feat either.

To nuke the cheese, I'd suggest you go the Warforged Artificer with a hard on hate for Wizards/Sorcerers, (ditching the corrupt part), and simply have it that you want revenge for something, hence the Mage Slayer feats. And I'd say there would be nothing wrong with using the Arcane part, but as written, you really don't have any leeway, by the very definition of your character, if arcane is equal to corruption, then you wouldn't use it, even with the analogy of fighting fire with fire.

my 2 cents..
sircedric4
04-28-07, 10:32 PM I didn't see anything in the code of conduct about it being taboo to reply immediately in a thread, so here goes. :)

Thanks for the insight, not having a DM, I don't have the give and take, compromise, and just general idea shaping that comes from more than one person. I didn't describe my notion well about how he see mages, I got it straight in my head its just hard to put to words. It is along the lines of the mage hate/revenge thing that you listed but it is also a distaste of external magic as opposed to internal magic. (it seems corruption wasn't a good word :( ) I guess I could go psionics or something but I just really like the building and using items approach.

Its good to see that the concept has a chance with a little work, after seeing that the mage slayer feats don't punish an artificer by RAW. I already figured I'd be limited to the items that I made, since mage built and cleric built items are generally associated with a spell caster level, where artificer devices are deemed different. I look forward to some more opinions on the subject.
ekomega
04-29-07, 03:06 AM I think the previous poster went a little overboard. If I were your DM, I wouldn't make the character kill himself, or anything of the sort. It sounds like an interesting idea.

I'd suggest that the player play a psionic artificer character, possibly a psiforged one, and then take mage-slayer, etc. The character could hate mages, and feel they don't deserve whatever, and he could be justified, because they do everything a completely different way than the psi-ficer. He'd still be an artificer, but a slightly different one. This character might just be ignorant and not understand what mages do exactly, because by being a psiforged and a psi-ficer, mage things are so foreign to him.

There are very few reasons for a DM to shoot down an interesting character concept, and most of these reasons don't exist when the player isn't trying to be a munchkin. No munchkin = fair game, usually.

Although in Eberron, magery isn't very weird, or lazy. It does take hard work. Now, dragonmarks, those are LAZY. I could see an artificer who breaks his back everyday hating those no good, lazy, greater and Siberys Cannith heirs who make things out of thin air. They **** me off.
Cifer
04-29-07, 08:41 AM But by RAW, it's simply that Infusions AREN'T arcane, nor are they Divine, niether are your scrolls, wands, etc, etc. So you can use them with impunity. I think it's cheese, and I'd never allow the Persistent spell feat either.
Mage Slayer doesn't differentiate by the lines of arcane and divine. It just deducts from the caster level, which is something the artificer has (read Disable Construct for an example: "Disable Construct transmutes the structure of a Construct to deal 10 points of damage per caster level")
timothyx
04-29-07, 05:30 PM I'd suggest that the player play a psionic artificer character, possibly a psiforged one, and then take mage-slayer, etc.

There are very few reasons for a DM to shoot down an interesting character concept, and most of these reasons don't exist when the player isn't trying to be a munchkin. No munchkin = fair game, usually.
/QUOTE]

I think the PsiForged PsiArtificer would be an excellent idea, taking the Mage Slayer feat line would be perfectly reasonable, and would actually make for a far more interesting character.

[QUOTE=Cifer;12246518]Mage Slayer doesn't differentiate by the lines of arcane and divine. It just deducts from the caster level, which is something the artificer has (read Disable Construct for an example: "Disable Construct transmutes the structure of a Construct to deal 10 points of damage per caster level")

The Mage slayer feats I would interpret as being Arcane spell levels, as opposed to Divine, but regardless, Artificers don't "cast" spells, they infuse, the "caster level" part is mearly jargon the editors use to keep it simple. I know this, because first time I read the Artificer stuff I was confused as hell, now I play the most brutally efficient Artificers anywhere. It's why I DM now, people don't like playing with me because I tend to ruin their finely laid plans by using things in ways they don't think of. It's not even being a munchkin or a powergamer, although I've been accused of it, and sometimes I'll agree.
Pinky's brain
04-30-07, 12:20 AM They aren't spells, they just follow all the rules for spells. There are too many caster level and spell level dependent rules for it to be any other way. Infusions have caster levels ... infusor levels sounds like crap anyway.
gaerfindel
04-30-07, 07:54 AM The roleplaying possibilities are numerous and excellent. I say go for it!
John Q. Mayhem
04-30-07, 08:20 AM Yeah, go for it, it sounds like fun. Almost as fun as an Ashbound ranger/barbarian/occult slayer mage slayer :evillaugh
Captain_Kobold
04-30-07, 09:46 AM While it is an interesting concept, I have to admit, I would rule that the Mage Slayer feat would reduce your Artificer caster levels in the same way that it would reduce your arcane, divine, warlock etc. caster levels.
Not because I'd want to kill the concept, but simply for reasons of fairness.

In the same way that Artificers use their caster levels to qualify for prestige classes, and improve their artificer caster level whilst in that class, I think that it would be reduced the same way.
I would, however also rule that the practiced spellcaster feat would give its normal benefit to an artificer as well.
sircedric4
04-30-07, 01:55 PM Thanks for the feedback so far, I will have to look into the Psionics stuff mentioned. Can you give me an idea of what books to find such info? I have the Psionics Handbook (or whatever the basic psionics rule book is called) but nothing Eberron specific beyond the Races of and Campaign manual.

The following is strictly opinion and how I plan to approach the character. I've still thinking of the regular artificer, I think I'm going to go along the lines of a radical type environmentalist. The warforged sees what happened in the Mournlands as being directly caused by large quantities of mages and spells being thrown about in a single epic battle that ultimately backfired and caused major havoc in the area. This also explains the "living spells". Since there aren't any "living items" (not counting constructs of course), he has no problem with magic that is bound into items because they are contained and thus not as likely to effect the surroundings as much as pulling the magic out of the ether.

An analogy of his viewpoint would be not minding coal producing plants with the proper safeguards, but hating the ones without to stop pollution. Items are magic properly safeguarded, and regular spells aren't safeguarded and thus dangerous to everyone. He is just trying to keep the Mournlands from happening everywhere, and thus makes a point of taking out spellcasters when he comes against them. (Unlike a truly radical, he will try to convince friendly mages of his ideals and not just kill them all, however if he comes across an evil caster in his adventuring he will target him over other enemies)

I haven't seen an "official" explanation for the Mournlands so I don't see a reason to squash the theory or character out of hand. And since I have the books for the regular artificer that is why I chose it.

Back to the specific topic: There seems to be conflicting opinion on the legality, it sounds like one of those grey areas and would come down to house rules. Once I get the name of those books I'll look at psicrafter instead. Thanks again folks.:D

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
sircedric4 04-28-07, 07:05 PM	I did a Google search but could not find any information with artificers and the mage slayer line of feats from Complete Arcane so I thought I'd seek some opinions. I am creating a warforged artificer (meleeficer), and although there are more optimum builds in the Unofficial Handbook, I was looking for something a little different. I'm keeping the Persistant Feat with a couple of buffable eternal wands, but the character I am building has a distinct dislike for mages. I'm thinking about using my regular feats to mage slay instead of heaping on the metamagic or combat feats. My question is whether you think that the caster level hits on spells and spell like abilities mentioned in the Mage Slayer line of feats applies to my infusions, the spell trigger items and such that I use, or to the items I create when using UMD to fake spells for enchanting? If it does, obviously I'll skip it since it would majorly gimp me. I like the notion of an artificer that feels that mages and their ilk are using "corrupt" magic since their not putting in the sweat equity to use items, and as a warforged I treating the energy for my spells as coming from within, where a mages capabilities come from without. My character is deadset against removing these "corrupters" and the mage slayer feats would make him good at it. I'm not actually playing a game now, just kicking the idea around in my head, so i don't have a DM to run the idea by, so I'm seeking some opinions. Do you think its just cheesy, not doable due to some RAW I'm missing, or a cool little loophole that sounds like an interesting meleeficer. (my first post here so "Hi!" and go easy on me:) )
timothyx 04-28-07, 07:52 PM	If you were my player. First thing I'd do. Is have you kill yourself. You're a creation of Arcane magic (based on the designs of contructs are primarilly created, but not exclusively by mages), and thus your belief in the Corupt nature of it would lead you to question your own existence (or should anyways), and thusly you would need to die. For the Mage slayer feats, knock yourself out, makes for an interesting Artificer, however, as your DM, I'd apply them to any Arcane spells you tried make scrolls/wands/infusions from the Arcane spell lists, etc. But by RAW, it's simply that Infusions AREN'T arcane, nor are they Divine, niether are your scrolls, wands, etc, etc. So you can use them with impunity. I think it's cheese, and I'd never allow the Persistent spell feat either. To nuke the cheese, I'd suggest you go the Warforged Artificer with a hard on hate for Wizards/Sorcerers, (ditching the corrupt part), and simply have it that you want revenge for something, hence the Mage Slayer feats. And I'd say there would be nothing wrong with using the Arcane part, but as written, you really don't have any leeway, by the very definition of your character, if arcane is equal to corruption, then you wouldn't use it, even with the analogy of fighting fire with fire. my 2 cents..
sircedric4 04-28-07, 10:32 PM	I didn't see anything in the code of conduct about it being taboo to reply immediately in a thread, so here goes. :) Thanks for the insight, not having a DM, I don't have the give and take, compromise, and just general idea shaping that comes from more than one person. I didn't describe my notion well about how he see mages, I got it straight in my head its just hard to put to words. It is along the lines of the mage hate/revenge thing that you listed but it is also a distaste of external magic as opposed to internal magic. (it seems corruption wasn't a good word :( ) I guess I could go psionics or something but I just really like the building and using items approach. Its good to see that the concept has a chance with a little work, after seeing that the mage slayer feats don't punish an artificer by RAW. I already figured I'd be limited to the items that I made, since mage built and cleric built items are generally associated with a spell caster level, where artificer devices are deemed different. I look forward to some more opinions on the subject.
ekomega 04-29-07, 03:06 AM	I think the previous poster went a little overboard. If I were your DM, I wouldn't make the character kill himself, or anything of the sort. It sounds like an interesting idea. I'd suggest that the player play a psionic artificer character, possibly a psiforged one, and then take mage-slayer, etc. The character could hate mages, and feel they don't deserve whatever, and he could be justified, because they do everything a completely different way than the psi-ficer. He'd still be an artificer, but a slightly different one. This character might just be ignorant and not understand what mages do exactly, because by being a psiforged and a psi-ficer, mage things are so foreign to him. There are very few reasons for a DM to shoot down an interesting character concept, and most of these reasons don't exist when the player isn't trying to be a munchkin. No munchkin = fair game, usually. Although in Eberron, magery isn't very weird, or lazy. It does take hard work. Now, dragonmarks, those are LAZY. I could see an artificer who breaks his back everyday hating those no good, lazy, greater and Siberys Cannith heirs who make things out of thin air. They **** me off.
Cifer 04-29-07, 08:41 AM	But by RAW, it's simply that Infusions AREN'T arcane, nor are they Divine, niether are your scrolls, wands, etc, etc. So you can use them with impunity. I think it's cheese, and I'd never allow the Persistent spell feat either. Mage Slayer doesn't differentiate by the lines of arcane and divine. It just deducts from the caster level, which is something the artificer has (read Disable Construct for an example: "Disable Construct transmutes the structure of a Construct to deal 10 points of damage per caster level")
timothyx 04-29-07, 05:30 PM	I'd suggest that the player play a psionic artificer character, possibly a psiforged one, and then take mage-slayer, etc. There are very few reasons for a DM to shoot down an interesting character concept, and most of these reasons don't exist when the player isn't trying to be a munchkin. No munchkin = fair game, usually. /QUOTE] I think the PsiForged PsiArtificer would be an excellent idea, taking the Mage Slayer feat line would be perfectly reasonable, and would actually make for a far more interesting character. [QUOTE=Cifer;12246518]Mage Slayer doesn't differentiate by the lines of arcane and divine. It just deducts from the caster level, which is something the artificer has (read Disable Construct for an example: "Disable Construct transmutes the structure of a Construct to deal 10 points of damage per caster level") The Mage slayer feats I would interpret as being Arcane spell levels, as opposed to Divine, but regardless, Artificers don't "cast" spells, they infuse, the "caster level" part is mearly jargon the editors use to keep it simple. I know this, because first time I read the Artificer stuff I was confused as hell, now I play the most brutally efficient Artificers anywhere. It's why I DM now, people don't like playing with me because I tend to ruin their finely laid plans by using things in ways they don't think of. It's not even being a munchkin or a powergamer, although I've been accused of it, and sometimes I'll agree.
Pinky's brain 04-30-07, 12:20 AM	They aren't spells, they just follow all the rules for spells. There are too many caster level and spell level dependent rules for it to be any other way. Infusions have caster levels ... infusor levels sounds like crap anyway.
gaerfindel 04-30-07, 07:54 AM	The roleplaying possibilities are numerous and excellent. I say go for it!
John Q. Mayhem 04-30-07, 08:20 AM	Yeah, go for it, it sounds like fun. Almost as fun as an Ashbound ranger/barbarian/occult slayer mage slayer :evillaugh
Captain_Kobold 04-30-07, 09:46 AM	While it is an interesting concept, I have to admit, I would rule that the Mage Slayer feat would reduce your Artificer caster levels in the same way that it would reduce your arcane, divine, warlock etc. caster levels. Not because I'd want to kill the concept, but simply for reasons of fairness. In the same way that Artificers use their caster levels to qualify for prestige classes, and improve their artificer caster level whilst in that class, I think that it would be reduced the same way. I would, however also rule that the practiced spellcaster feat would give its normal benefit to an artificer as well.
sircedric4 04-30-07, 01:55 PM	Thanks for the feedback so far, I will have to look into the Psionics stuff mentioned. Can you give me an idea of what books to find such info? I have the Psionics Handbook (or whatever the basic psionics rule book is called) but nothing Eberron specific beyond the Races of and Campaign manual. The following is strictly opinion and how I plan to approach the character. I've still thinking of the regular artificer, I think I'm going to go along the lines of a radical type environmentalist. The warforged sees what happened in the Mournlands as being directly caused by large quantities of mages and spells being thrown about in a single epic battle that ultimately backfired and caused major havoc in the area. This also explains the "living spells". Since there aren't any "living items" (not counting constructs of course), he has no problem with magic that is bound into items because they are contained and thus not as likely to effect the surroundings as much as pulling the magic out of the ether. An analogy of his viewpoint would be not minding coal producing plants with the proper safeguards, but hating the ones without to stop pollution. Items are magic properly safeguarded, and regular spells aren't safeguarded and thus dangerous to everyone. He is just trying to keep the Mournlands from happening everywhere, and thus makes a point of taking out spellcasters when he comes against them. (Unlike a truly radical, he will try to convince friendly mages of his ideals and not just kill them all, however if he comes across an evil caster in his adventuring he will target him over other enemies) I haven't seen an "official" explanation for the Mournlands so I don't see a reason to squash the theory or character out of hand. And since I have the books for the regular artificer that is why I chose it. Back to the specific topic: There seems to be conflicting opinion on the legality, it sounds like one of those grey areas and would come down to house rules. Once I get the name of those books I'll look at psicrafter instead. Thanks again folks.:D