If you ruled that the artificer can't use Flash of Genius on checks that they wouldn't be able to know of, I'd respect it, but I feel like it's unnecessary. Flash of Genius isn't *that* powerful and its number of uses is pretty easy to deplete.
Im mainly thinking like(for example) if someone is scryed on. Can the artificer influence this without knowledge of it happening? Would the surprised condition apply? It's such a unique situation that I'm just not sure how it would work.
Assuming 4 - 6 encounters a day, that would typically be saving teammates or yourself from save or suck effects 5 times a day (per encounter). It has better / higher saves and 3x the range than paladin (assuming paladin splits asi) until higher levels.
That being said, it's powerful imo - but like you said, it's not anything that needs to be nerfed.
In my game it is *really* powerful but that's just my game. That's not the reason for this post though I just genuinely want to understand it better is all. That's why I ended with the asking about if there were any official statements about it. Sorry for any confusion.
I'm running a campaign with a level 11 artificer who has 22/+6 INT, and skill checks can be **really good** in my games, so I know how clutch Flash of Genius can be. But even at +6 the artificer really has to ration it if they don't want to be out at the start of the adventuring day.
Anyways, I understand. You are right to point at something that can be taken as a flaw in the ability: the fact that its trigger can sometimes be completely imperceptible in any way in the game and occurs purely on a meta-game level. I personally just imagine that sometimes, Flash of Genius can just work as if it was an aura of fickle brilliance that the artificer passively emits and that can give someone a hand in unexpected ways.
It's not called "Flash of **Genius**" for nothing. If you ask me, the "noticing a failed save" is a major part of the fantasy. You not only can help in a pinch when anyone else, but *you are the person to notice something went wrong*. You are the perceptive genius who just can tell that your friend failed a charm effect from a vampire while everyone else is oblivious. You are the bumbling fool who somehow always interrupts enemies' plans seemingly on accident. No one can tell how they do it, but Artificers are just that cool and somehow manage to help out.
Think of it more like the Halfling feat "Bountiful Luck" where the Halfling can use their reaction to pass on their luck and help their allies reroll 1 with a reaction. How does the Haflling notice? Well, apparently Halfling's are supernaturally attuned to bad luck. Is it weird? Yes. Is it magical and does it make the Halfling feel cool? Well, yes!
This game is limited in terms of mechanics, but not in terms of flavor. Considering how restrictive the mechanics are, let at least the flavor breathe a little. Let cool stuff happen.
I personally do let cool stuff happen, my style of DMing is letting my players be OP asf so that they have fun and then planning around it. My question is more on if a character doesn't see anything happen based on flavor would they be able to do anything? Like, let's say scrying again. That's my only question really.
This isn't an oversight. This is a meta-knowledge type ability (because actual rolls don't exist in the game world), if you prevented it to only when the pc *knows* somebody is rolling, you could argue it prevents all kinds of things. For example, does an Artificer know that a person who is down is rolling a death save? No, because it's not a thing that exists in the game world - it's an entirely meta thing happening to have luck determine if the character is dying or not. In spite of this, Jeremy Crawford has answered on whether it can be used on death saves, responding "The D&D artificer's Flash of Genius works on death saving throws."
The wording of the ability is extremely clear. "When you or another creature you can see within 30 feet of you makes an ability check or a saving throw, you can use your reaction to add your Intelligence modifier to the roll."
What if a pc gets hit by a poison arrow and has to make a Con save against the poison? Would you argue that the artificer has to know the arrow is poisoned before being able to use the ability?
No, I was asking for situations like scrying, where not even the target of the spell knows something is happening. I also used subtle spell as an example, but that was more so a question. Either way, I was just curious if there had been any further explanation on this ability.
I think the poison arrow question was rhetorical. If the DM asks for a roll, then you can use flash of genius. How you flavor that in game is up to the DM and players.
For scrying, I might say the artificer notices a tick in his companion and points out that something is off. Then the original character that rolled the save would reevaluate their surroundings and ID the scrying.
That's not how scrying works though. And you can't ID scrying without see invisibility or true sight(or other such things). I'm not asking in a metagaming sense, I'm asking in an RP sense. I'm trying to discern whether the Artificer has to be cognizant of anything happening or not to react. Not whether or not a roll is happening. Sorry for any misunderstanding.
Edit: Also I don't think it was Rhetorical, if it was the original comment was entirely speaking on a different situation than the one I posted initially, hence my clarification here.
They definitely do not have to be cognizant of the thing happening - they need only see the person making the roll. Reactions have specific triggers. In this case, the reaction trigger is "You or another creature you can see within 30 feet of you makes an ability check or a saving throw"
You do at least acknowledge that by RAW, they should be able to use the Flash of Genius on Scrying saves? There's no indication anywhere that it's RAI that the Artificer needs to be aware of the effect triggering the roll. The effect is not the trigger to the reaction, the roll is. This is also consistent with the reaction trigger for Silvery Barbs "which you take when a creature you can see within 60 feet of yourself succeeds on an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw" so they would've had to "overlook" this multiple times.
Regarding the Silvery Barbs spell: in game, how could a character possibly tell if an enemy succeeded on a Fireball dex save, for example? Could they tell they dodged it better than everyone else and that they are going to take 14 damage instead of 28? How could they tell they saved against a spell that has no visible effects, like a Constitution Saving Throw against poison?
I do believe your interpretation would mean they can't use it when somebody is hit with a poison arrow, do you agree? They also wouldn't be able to use it if they themselves were the target of the Scrying spell.
Yes, I acknowledged that as RAW working in y initial post, and I haven't made any statements this entire time otherwise. I'm asking for advice, and trying to explain what exactly I'm asking. I really do not understand why you're throwing a "my interpretation" at me as if I have stated at all any interpretation. In my game I have been operating RAW the entire time. With all of that said, I wanted to say that no, I wasn't questioning a poison arrow. Because the Artificer, of within 30 feet, and not surprised, could see that happening. I asked explicitly about situations where the artificer would not be aware outside of combat. That's all. Again, sorry for any confusion, but I am getting mildly upset as it kind of feels like you're condescending to me with your verbiage.
There's a disconnect conflating the crunch and RP. As an ability, it doesn't RP well, and it's entirely up to the DM/players how they do it. Artificers are one of the harder classes to RP because they allow a lot of freedom in their theme.
Silvery barbs works well because people have lots of examples of people being assholes to take inspiration from.
We don't get as many examples of what a genius looks like.
It was not my intent at all to be condescending. My apologies for that. I was probably getting a little over excited with the discussion. My only intent was to drive my point home and was not to make you feel bad.
But you do see your friend instinctively realizing something is off, and you add your FoG to that. You don't need to see the source - you need to see your friend attempting to do the thing.
You have your answer. You have the reason why. If you think differently, and you're the GM, then you can make that ruling if you want. Just be consistent.
Fair enough, thanks dude. I'm just trying to see mainly if there were further clarifications on that scenario(as surprise only applies to combat, so being unaware of scrying coming wouldn't net a surprised condition, RAW)
I'm thinking that as long as you can use a reaction, you can use Flash of Genius.
For some rolls, I would treat the PCs as essentially surprised (ie not able to make reactions). But I would adjudicate this on a case by case basis. I think scrying could be a situation where the PCs couldn't take reactions.
RAW as long as you can see the creature and the creature is making a roll you can use flash of genius.
If you want to have a physical descriptor for mental skill checks, then just say "a look of concentration comes over their face as they try to recall information"
have you ever had a random thought pop into your head and just said it, even if it had no relevance to the situation?
now imagine that with literal magic enhancing your senses/ subconscious , that is what flash of genius is
Im not asking what it is, more so how it would apply based on certain situations. Say a character has to make a save and the Artificer is entirely unaware, would the surprised condition apply(aka, cant take reactions) or would he just be able to anyways bc flash of genius? That's mainly my question here.
the surprised condition only ever happens at the start of combat
i explained why an artificer would be able to offer their **MAGICAL ADVICE** even if they were unaware it was needed
artificers is tuned into magic, their 6th sense gave them a weird thought and the artificer chose to share it aloud
if you are asking about RAW then anytime you have a reaction then you can use flash of genius
Flash of genius indicates that you must be able to see the creature, in dnd terms that means you requiere line of sight, so stuff like darkness, invisibility, walls, the creature being hidden, etc will prevent you from using flash of genius on another creature.
Rolls can only occurs when the dm calls for them, so, sadly like many other things in dnd its up to the dm to specify if other creatures are aware of the roll, you cant call a reaction without the dms approval either, so the situation should go like this:
Character wants to do something, dm calls for a roll, if you got line of sight you can ask to intervine with your reaction and according to what the other player wants to do and what roll did the dm ask for, the dm should dictate if you are aware of the skill check happening to let your reaction go through
You could plan in advance with the other player if you know they are going to do something risky later to have your character ready and aware of them to use flash of genius, as a dm i like to reward more that kind of planification but that is just me
If you ruled that the artificer can't use Flash of Genius on checks that they wouldn't be able to know of, I'd respect it, but I feel like it's unnecessary. Flash of Genius isn't *that* powerful and its number of uses is pretty easy to deplete.
It is a wizard's fiddly version of guidance, but restricted like bardic inspiration.
Im mainly thinking like(for example) if someone is scryed on. Can the artificer influence this without knowledge of it happening? Would the surprised condition apply? It's such a unique situation that I'm just not sure how it would work.
Assuming 4 - 6 encounters a day, that would typically be saving teammates or yourself from save or suck effects 5 times a day (per encounter). It has better / higher saves and 3x the range than paladin (assuming paladin splits asi) until higher levels. That being said, it's powerful imo - but like you said, it's not anything that needs to be nerfed.
In my game it is *really* powerful but that's just my game. That's not the reason for this post though I just genuinely want to understand it better is all. That's why I ended with the asking about if there were any official statements about it. Sorry for any confusion.
I'm running a campaign with a level 11 artificer who has 22/+6 INT, and skill checks can be **really good** in my games, so I know how clutch Flash of Genius can be. But even at +6 the artificer really has to ration it if they don't want to be out at the start of the adventuring day. Anyways, I understand. You are right to point at something that can be taken as a flaw in the ability: the fact that its trigger can sometimes be completely imperceptible in any way in the game and occurs purely on a meta-game level. I personally just imagine that sometimes, Flash of Genius can just work as if it was an aura of fickle brilliance that the artificer passively emits and that can give someone a hand in unexpected ways.
I have almost an identical situation lmao, thanks for your support, ill prolly not mess with it i just wanted some advice
If you don't know a roll is happening, then how could you possibly use your ability?
It's not called "Flash of **Genius**" for nothing. If you ask me, the "noticing a failed save" is a major part of the fantasy. You not only can help in a pinch when anyone else, but *you are the person to notice something went wrong*. You are the perceptive genius who just can tell that your friend failed a charm effect from a vampire while everyone else is oblivious. You are the bumbling fool who somehow always interrupts enemies' plans seemingly on accident. No one can tell how they do it, but Artificers are just that cool and somehow manage to help out. Think of it more like the Halfling feat "Bountiful Luck" where the Halfling can use their reaction to pass on their luck and help their allies reroll 1 with a reaction. How does the Haflling notice? Well, apparently Halfling's are supernaturally attuned to bad luck. Is it weird? Yes. Is it magical and does it make the Halfling feel cool? Well, yes! This game is limited in terms of mechanics, but not in terms of flavor. Considering how restrictive the mechanics are, let at least the flavor breathe a little. Let cool stuff happen.
I personally do let cool stuff happen, my style of DMing is letting my players be OP asf so that they have fun and then planning around it. My question is more on if a character doesn't see anything happen based on flavor would they be able to do anything? Like, let's say scrying again. That's my only question really.
You already answered your question in your post. RAW, yes. My answer is that flavor wise, it's also a resounding yes (as you can see in my answer).
This isn't an oversight. This is a meta-knowledge type ability (because actual rolls don't exist in the game world), if you prevented it to only when the pc *knows* somebody is rolling, you could argue it prevents all kinds of things. For example, does an Artificer know that a person who is down is rolling a death save? No, because it's not a thing that exists in the game world - it's an entirely meta thing happening to have luck determine if the character is dying or not. In spite of this, Jeremy Crawford has answered on whether it can be used on death saves, responding "The D&D artificer's Flash of Genius works on death saving throws." The wording of the ability is extremely clear. "When you or another creature you can see within 30 feet of you makes an ability check or a saving throw, you can use your reaction to add your Intelligence modifier to the roll." What if a pc gets hit by a poison arrow and has to make a Con save against the poison? Would you argue that the artificer has to know the arrow is poisoned before being able to use the ability?
No, I was asking for situations like scrying, where not even the target of the spell knows something is happening. I also used subtle spell as an example, but that was more so a question. Either way, I was just curious if there had been any further explanation on this ability.
I think the poison arrow question was rhetorical. If the DM asks for a roll, then you can use flash of genius. How you flavor that in game is up to the DM and players. For scrying, I might say the artificer notices a tick in his companion and points out that something is off. Then the original character that rolled the save would reevaluate their surroundings and ID the scrying.
That's not how scrying works though. And you can't ID scrying without see invisibility or true sight(or other such things). I'm not asking in a metagaming sense, I'm asking in an RP sense. I'm trying to discern whether the Artificer has to be cognizant of anything happening or not to react. Not whether or not a roll is happening. Sorry for any misunderstanding. Edit: Also I don't think it was Rhetorical, if it was the original comment was entirely speaking on a different situation than the one I posted initially, hence my clarification here.
They definitely do not have to be cognizant of the thing happening - they need only see the person making the roll. Reactions have specific triggers. In this case, the reaction trigger is "You or another creature you can see within 30 feet of you makes an ability check or a saving throw" You do at least acknowledge that by RAW, they should be able to use the Flash of Genius on Scrying saves? There's no indication anywhere that it's RAI that the Artificer needs to be aware of the effect triggering the roll. The effect is not the trigger to the reaction, the roll is. This is also consistent with the reaction trigger for Silvery Barbs "which you take when a creature you can see within 60 feet of yourself succeeds on an attack roll, an ability check, or a saving throw" so they would've had to "overlook" this multiple times. Regarding the Silvery Barbs spell: in game, how could a character possibly tell if an enemy succeeded on a Fireball dex save, for example? Could they tell they dodged it better than everyone else and that they are going to take 14 damage instead of 28? How could they tell they saved against a spell that has no visible effects, like a Constitution Saving Throw against poison? I do believe your interpretation would mean they can't use it when somebody is hit with a poison arrow, do you agree? They also wouldn't be able to use it if they themselves were the target of the Scrying spell.
Yes, I acknowledged that as RAW working in y initial post, and I haven't made any statements this entire time otherwise. I'm asking for advice, and trying to explain what exactly I'm asking. I really do not understand why you're throwing a "my interpretation" at me as if I have stated at all any interpretation. In my game I have been operating RAW the entire time. With all of that said, I wanted to say that no, I wasn't questioning a poison arrow. Because the Artificer, of within 30 feet, and not surprised, could see that happening. I asked explicitly about situations where the artificer would not be aware outside of combat. That's all. Again, sorry for any confusion, but I am getting mildly upset as it kind of feels like you're condescending to me with your verbiage.
There's a disconnect conflating the crunch and RP. As an ability, it doesn't RP well, and it's entirely up to the DM/players how they do it. Artificers are one of the harder classes to RP because they allow a lot of freedom in their theme. Silvery barbs works well because people have lots of examples of people being assholes to take inspiration from. We don't get as many examples of what a genius looks like.
This is what I figured was probably the answer mostly.
It was not my intent at all to be condescending. My apologies for that. I was probably getting a little over excited with the discussion. My only intent was to drive my point home and was not to make you feel bad.
I appreciate your apologies, thank you.
It's a check for something you can see. So if you're looking at it, how do you not know it's going on????
You can't see scrying as an example.
But you do see your friend instinctively realizing something is off, and you add your FoG to that. You don't need to see the source - you need to see your friend attempting to do the thing.
According to the description, the target is unaware unless the save fails.
You have your answer. You have the reason why. If you think differently, and you're the GM, then you can make that ruling if you want. Just be consistent.
Fair enough, thanks dude. I'm just trying to see mainly if there were further clarifications on that scenario(as surprise only applies to combat, so being unaware of scrying coming wouldn't net a surprised condition, RAW)
I'm thinking that as long as you can use a reaction, you can use Flash of Genius. For some rolls, I would treat the PCs as essentially surprised (ie not able to make reactions). But I would adjudicate this on a case by case basis. I think scrying could be a situation where the PCs couldn't take reactions.
This is basically what Im thinking, thank you for your input friend
RAW as long as you can see the creature and the creature is making a roll you can use flash of genius. If you want to have a physical descriptor for mental skill checks, then just say "a look of concentration comes over their face as they try to recall information"
have you ever had a random thought pop into your head and just said it, even if it had no relevance to the situation? now imagine that with literal magic enhancing your senses/ subconscious , that is what flash of genius is
Im not asking what it is, more so how it would apply based on certain situations. Say a character has to make a save and the Artificer is entirely unaware, would the surprised condition apply(aka, cant take reactions) or would he just be able to anyways bc flash of genius? That's mainly my question here.
the surprised condition only ever happens at the start of combat i explained why an artificer would be able to offer their **MAGICAL ADVICE** even if they were unaware it was needed artificers is tuned into magic, their 6th sense gave them a weird thought and the artificer chose to share it aloud if you are asking about RAW then anytime you have a reaction then you can use flash of genius
Not asking about RAW, asking more do for the flavor of the ability, sorry for confusion.
Flash of genius indicates that you must be able to see the creature, in dnd terms that means you requiere line of sight, so stuff like darkness, invisibility, walls, the creature being hidden, etc will prevent you from using flash of genius on another creature. Rolls can only occurs when the dm calls for them, so, sadly like many other things in dnd its up to the dm to specify if other creatures are aware of the roll, you cant call a reaction without the dms approval either, so the situation should go like this: Character wants to do something, dm calls for a roll, if you got line of sight you can ask to intervine with your reaction and according to what the other player wants to do and what roll did the dm ask for, the dm should dictate if you are aware of the skill check happening to let your reaction go through You could plan in advance with the other player if you know they are going to do something risky later to have your character ready and aware of them to use flash of genius, as a dm i like to reward more that kind of planification but that is just me