Unearthed Arcana - ARTIFICER

[jaappleton]

They threw us a curve ball!

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/artificer

And to everyone who said, "Oh, we're not getting Eberron..."

-MIC DROP-

[Caelestion]

I was thinking that the Alchemist archetype rather resembled the Pathfinder class actually.

[M Placeholder]

They threw us a curve ball!

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/artificer

And to everyone who said, "Oh, we're not getting Eberron..."

-MIC DROP-

Its just one class, and there is nothing in the UA that mentions that campaign setting. Don't assume anything yet.

[rooneg]

This is so much cooler than the wizard subclass they did before.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Well, this is a surprise.

Interesting, but I'm struggling to see what role it would fit into in a normal party. I guess it makes a pretty decent B&E man with the automatic expertise in Thief's Tools. And if you took Forger's Kit and Disguise Kit, that makes you a darn good manipulator. Otherwise, though, it seems like it might have trouble finding a role.

[jaappleton]

Its just one class, and there is nothing in the UA that mentions that campaign setting. Don't assume anything yet.

It's not just one class. Many of the previous UA articles had allusions to Eberron as well in their flavor text.

[GhorrinRedblade]

"This is my BOOMSTICK!"

Oh I'm experiencing an unhealthy attraction to this class already and it hasn't been five minutes.

[rooneg]

Well, this is a surprise.

Interesting, but I'm struggling to see what role it would fit into in a normal party. I guess it makes a pretty decent B&E man with the automatic expertise in Thief's Tools. And if you took Forger's Kit and Disguise Kit, that makes you a darn good manipulator. Otherwise, though, it seems like it might have trouble finding a role.

The role is "I throw bombs, hand out potions and I have a giant mechanical ape that follows me around everywhere", sounds good to me!

[Nicrosil]

I'm loving the 6th level ability; it reminds me of that 3.5 class from Dungeonscape that let you make constructs.

Edit: the spellcasting is strange. It's a third caster? I'm AFB, does it follow the Arcane Trickster/Eldritch Knight spellcasting? If it doesn't, how would spell slots work for a multiclassinf artificer? Something I like liked about 5e was how all casters followed the same progression, just at full, half, or third rates.

[Arcangel4774]

Piercing round increases from 4d6 to 4d6. I assume, based on others all increasing to 3d6 at the level prior, it was supposed to start at 3d6 and increase to 4d6.

[jaappleton]

It's certainly very unique. It doesn't get a 2nd attack, which I find... Weird. Not necessarily bad, just... weird.

I'm a bit surprised it doesn't have the Shield spell on its list. Seems like it should, given the flavor and the other spells available.

Also note that it seems like the Thunder Cannon's abilities (And the Alchemist Flasks) don't do half damage on a miss. That's... Hmm.

It's an AoE Rogue, isn't it? That's kinda the feel of the class. An AoE focused Arcane Trickster of sorts.

[jaappleton]

I'm loving the 6th level ability; it reminds me of that 3.5 class from Dungeonscape that let you make constructs.

Edit: the spellcasting is strange. It's a third caster? I'm AFB, does it follow the Arcane Trickster/Eldritch Knight spellcasting? If it doesn't, how would spell slots work for a multiclassinf artificer? Something I like liked about 5e was how all casters followed the same progression, just at full, half, or third rates.

It does seem to follow EK / AT.

[Trum4n1208]

As a lover of the Ranger, I'm slightly sad that we didn't get new subclasses, but I'm really intrigued by Artificer. It looks like it'd be fun to play.

[jaappleton]

As a lover of the Ranger, I'm slightly sad that we didn't get new subclasses, but I'm really intrigued by Artificer. It looks like it'd be fun to play.

Crawford on Twitter: "More subclasses next week"

[Millstone85]

What I like the most is the 4th level "Infuse Magic" feature.

My friend, I just improvised a Wristband of Levitation. Use it within the next 8 hours if you need. :smallsmile:

[Trum4n1208]

Crawford on Twitter: "More subclasses next week"

Woo! Again, don't get me wrong, I'm very pleased with artificer.

[jaappleton]

As far as what role does the Artificer serve...?

Well, lets look.

It can do a little healing. It's a 1/3rd spellcaster, without an extra attack. It's got proficiency in Thieves tools, and expertise in them. It's a d8 hit die class. Gunsmith focuses on AoE, Alchemist focuses on controller effects.

It's the proverbial 5th man. It's not a Mage, it's not a Rogue, it's not a Face, it's not a Warrior.

But if your group has that covered, and need someone to contribute a little of everything? It's a pretty good choice.

I wonder how a party of 4 Artificers would do. Four Gnomes just pull out Thunder Cannons and barrage a battlefield with mortar attacks, and you count what's alive after their surprise round :smallbiggrin:

[Flashy]

Also note that it seems like the Thunder Cannon's abilities (And the Alchemist Flasks) don't do half damage on a miss. That's... Hmm.

Given that they're at-will abilities it'd be sort of overwhelming for them to deal half damage on a failure. They're more like powerful cantrips than weak spells.

[jaappleton]

What I like the most is the 4th level "Infuse Magic" feature.

My friend, I just improvised a Wristband of Levitation. Use it within the next 8 hours if you need. :smallsmile:

No Darkvision? No problem.

[Battlebooze]

That capstone ability is fantastic. It's also 100% crap. It's crap because so many other capstone abilities are nearly worthless. +6 to all saves? What? It's good hardly anyone ever gets to 20th level.

I guess Artificers can hang out with the Onion Druids at 20th.

Aside from that, it looks fun to me.

[jaappleton]

Given that they're at-will abilities it'd be sort of overwhelming for them to deal half damage on a failure. They're more like powerful cantrips than weak spells.

That's likely how they intend you to look at it. I hadn't thought of it prior to you mentioning it.

Hmm... On that note, I see it. I like it. I also like how it goes up with Artificer level, for balance reasons. Otherwise, if they were actual cantrips, think of the fun a Quickened Sorcerer would have.

[Flashy]

Also, it's worth pointing out that both Gunsmith and Alchemist get sneak attack equivalent damage scaling through subclass abilities. The artificer doesn't need extra attack.

[jaappleton]

That capstone ability is fantastic. It's also 100% crap. It's crap because so many other capstone abilities are nearly worthless. +6 to all saves? What? It's good hardly anyone ever gets to 20th level.

I guess Artificers can hang out with the Onion Druids at 20th.

Aside from that, it looks fun to me.

Artificer with attuned items and a Paladin in the party? You just save on everything.

[Arcangel4774]

The role is "I throw bombs, hand out potions and I have a giant mechanical ape that follows me around everywhere", sounds good to me!

Mechanical beast is large, not medium (ape) or huge (giant ape). Might I recommend a giant eagle?

[Coyote81]

I kind of get a Int-based Ranger feel from these guys. Kind of jack of various trades, beast companion, however with ranged attacks only.

[Nicrosil]

I just noticed that Infuse Spell only works on artificer spells. Should help reduce potential cheese, and answer questions about stuff like duration or concentration.

[BRC]

Hrmm, interesting.

The Gunsmith is kind of in an odd place, since it's DPS isn't going to scale up as fast as a full martial, but is, I think a hair ahead of a wizard with firebolts. If you're a gunsmith, I guess you're treating your Dex as a your primary stat, rather than your Intelligence.

So, at 5th level you're making one attack at, what. 3d6+3? average out to about 12 damage, compared to a wizard throwing 2d10 firebolts for avg 10? Your attacks scale up faster than a wizard's.

but I guess you still get your robo-bear and support utilities to make up for mildly suboptimal damage.


Also, is it just me or is the "Wondrous Invention" list kind of thrown together at random? Ring of Jumping shows up at 20th level, after you've already had a chance to grab Boots of Striding and Springing and Broom of Flying

Wings of Flying seem worse than both Broom of Flying (Which shows up at a lower level) and Winged Boots, since it's only one hour of use (Even if you get a 60ft flying speed).

[Steampunkette]

I am in love with this class.

I've NEVER liked Artificers in D&D. I always thought they came across as wizards with some doofy gimmicks like 3e's "Candlecaster"

But this? This is a character I would delightedly play. In fact I want to make a dwarven Artificer with a thundergun.

And I don't even PLAY dwarves.

[Ralanr]

Now I want a kobold gunner.

Actually now I just want to play 5e. I want a good 3 hour session, not two hours of talking. Sigh...I miss college.

[VoxRationis]

It's nice to be able to play the locksmith without automatically going for rogue. Does anyone else find it odd that the construct companion isn't immune to psychic damage? An enemy bard can insult it, a bunch of clockwork, to death.
In any case, the idea looks fun. A nice utility character as a Rogue alternative or as a general fifth man. I wonder if there's a good flying mount candidate to match with the Gunsmith option (AFB currently).

[Spectre9000]

Is it just me, or does anyone else think this seems like the Matt Mercer UA? Seriously, we got the Witch Hunter and Gunslinger combined into one class.

[Caelestion]

It's not just one class. Many of the previous UA articles had allusions to Eberron as well in their flavor text.

It's taken almost two years for the Artificer to go from a wizard tradition to a full 20-level class. I'd have stopped holding my breath a long time ago by now.

[rooneg]

Mechanical beast is large, not medium (ape) or huge (giant ape). Might I recommend a giant eagle?

I will simply have to settle for a mechanical Polar Bear.

[jaappleton]

So if your Mechanical Servant is a brown fox or an yellow and black electric mouse, what happens when you're an Alchemist and use a Thunderstone on it?

:smalltongue:

[Regitnui]

HELL.

BLEEPING.

YES.

*Starts dancing a happy dance* Eberron, Eberron, Eberron has artificers! And artificers that feel like the Master McGyver (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MacGyvering) they were in 3.5! I cannot stop grinning! If nothing else, this hints at a setting book for Eberron next. I don't know when, but when we leave the Forgotten Realms we're heading to Eberron!

[jaappleton]

It's taken almost two years for the Artificer to go from a wizard tradition to a full 20-level class. I'd have stopped holding my breath a long time ago by now.

I was referring to some things in the newer UA articles. For example, there were plenty of comments from people MUCH more knowledgeable than myself that had plenty to say about how the Druid UA seemed to have heavy hints of Eberron flavor. You can find that topic for yourself and take a look if you'd like.

[Flashy]

So, at 5th level you're making one attack at, what. 3d6+3? average out to about 12 damage, compared to a wizard throwing 2d10 firebolts for avg 10? Your attacks scale up faster than a wizard's.

4d6+3. Thunder Monger is adding 2d6 at fifth level. It's not a ton of additional damage but it makes a difference.

[jaappleton]

I will simply have to settle for a mechanical Polar Bear.

That's the best kind of polar bear.

[rlc]

I like it. It's interesting that the gunsmith gets proficiency only in its own guns and not all guns, but I guess that kind of makes sense.

[Steel Mirror]

Sweet! Man I just started a game, I'm so tempted to turn back the clock on that and look for someone who wants to play an artificer. They look like a lot of fun!

The gunsmith subclass isn't necessarily very Eberron-y, or maybe I just didn't notice if guns are supposed to be a thing somewhere in the setting.

I'd say that I want a subclass that focuses on magic items or wand-wielding, which more fits my experience with artificers back in 3.5, but the base class seems to do the magic item thing pretty well (especially given how stingy 5E generally is with magic items) and a wand wielder might be harder to do in a game where you hardly ever have much of a chance to even see any wands. Then again, maybe the subclass could craft its own wands to use in combat, much like the Artificer already does with Wondrous Invention?

I don't really like that Tool Expertise only works with proficiencies gained through the class. I imagine it's probably to do with multiclassing concerns somehow, but what about the tool proficiencies you chose through your Artisan background, or got through being a dwarf or tinker gnome? It's unfortunate that those tool proficiencies can't benefit just as well from this otherwise very fitting and flavorful class ability.

They are now officially spellcasters, as opposed to their 3.5 versions which were totally not spells, honestly, they were infusions! That's a minor flavor and mechanics change. Doesn't really bother me honestly, but some people will probably be less comfortable with it for Eberron.

Mechanical servant looks really cool. One of my artificers back in 3.5 made a horde of homunculi which basically ran his lab-castle and came with him on adventures. This new version looks like a great way to get a pack mule that doesn't eat, breathe, get spooked, or require stabling fees, and I'm sure people will come up with various fun ways to use creatures in the MM for fun and profit. Less abusable than the old craft homunculus feat, which is very good!

Overall this looks fantastic. I hope I get a chance to see one in action soon!

[BRC]

4d6+3. Thunder Monger is adding 2d6 at fifth level. It's not a ton of additional damage but it makes a difference.

Hrmmm, still won't keep you in line with the Martials making multiple attacks, but nothing should match a full martial character making multiple attacks when it comes to round-to-round damage.

If you're going Gunsmith, you probably want to dip into Fighter to pick up the Archery fighting style, and do anything else you can to maximize your chance of hitting. If you're counting on that gun as your contribution in battle, you can't really afford to miss.


Hrmm, actually, a Gunsmith with three levels of Fighter could be really powerful. Action Surge allows for a nova turn (Fire, Reload as bonus, Fire), that doesn't interrupt later turns (You Bonus reload at the start of the turn, then Fire), You're rolling a ton of dice, so you get a huge benefit from Crits, enough that a 19-20 crit range might be worth considering.

The issue is that the Artificer's abilities scale up with Class level, not character. So by dipping you're giving up 3 levels worth of Thunder Monger improvements.


Also: Good choices for mechanical companions:

Ape: Has hands, climb speed, and a ranged attack.

Rhinoceros: Great carrying capacity, best attack for your buck, capable of dealing 4d8+5 bludgeoning damage + str save or knocked prone on a charge.

Saber-Toothed Tiger: Similar to the Rhino, but less carrying capacity. Can use it's Pounce attack to knock a target prone and make an extra attack. Still, if you want damage, go Rhino.

Snake (Giant Constrictor): Is a Huge beast, doesn't apply.

Spider (Giant): You're losing CR, but the Web attack could be very useful at restraining enemies.
Vulture (Giant) Probably the best Flyer you have? Between pack tactics and Multiattack. Strength could be higher, but not bad.

Shark (Hunter): If you are in an aquatic campaign. A nasty bite attack made with advantage.

Octopus (Giant): Similar attack profile to the Shark, but with grapple and an ink cloud. Plus, can hold breath out of water for 1 hour.


So yeah, my money goes to the Rhinoceros, both as a pack-beast, mount, and deadly combatant.

[Garresh]

Anyone know what the intent is behind Infused items with regards to concentration? Does it take concentration when you cast it, or when the person holding it activates it? Or does it use their concentration? This massively affects how good it is.

[8wGremlin]

The Gnomes of Lantan had guns in Forgotten Realms, hell even the Red Wizards of Thay had cannons.
but I'm so over Forgotten realms now.

[Spectre9000]

Umm, does its special attacks work with Haste? Cause that would be kinda OP.

[jaappleton]

I'm slightly disappointed that the Mechanical Servant doesn't scale up at all at higher levels. Its health is going to be rather small, all things considered, at higher levels.

[Oramac]

I wonder how a party of 4 Artificers would do. Four Gnomes just pull out Thunder Cannons and barrage a battlefield with mortar attacks, and you count what's alive after their surprise round :smallbiggrin:

I. Want. To. See. This!

[pangoo209]

Is it just me, or does anyone else think this seems like the Matt Mercer UA? Seriously, we got the Witch Hunter and Gunslinger combined into one class.


Yeah, I agree with you. I'm not familiar with the witch hunter yet (Episode 20 as of now), but the gunslinger seems similar. Although i'd really like to get a more experienced player's opinions on which is a better one to pick.

[Slayn82]

The table has a "Masterwork Feature" at levels 3, 9, 14 and 17. I think those are probably the new abilities you get from the subclass.

Liking the alchemists more. Using Thunderstone to knock enemies prone and push them away, acid to destroy objects, the healing draught, and the tanglefoot bag. Knock them down and send your golem to grab them.

[Foxhound438]

seems really neat to me. Here's my observations:

1) the damage from either subclass is pretty much in line with a rogue- the alchemist is a bit on the low end, lacking a base weapon damage attached, but having the AOE fire option makes it kind of a side grade.

2) alchemist seems to be good for anyone who's dice consistently disagree with them, similar to potent casting clerics. I think I'll have to try one when this gets an official release

3) the "animal" companion comes in at level 6 and already has almost as much HP as PHB beast master ranger can get at L20 if you take giant constrictor snake as your stat block (size categories are hard, but my point is that it has decent HP where beast master didn't). Extra points for it being specifically allowed to reflavor things, so you can have whichever stat block has the best stats and give it whatever shape you want. For me, this basically means big crab grabs things and I throw acid at them.

4) spell power is on the weak side, probably to more or less keep in line with arcane trickster in casting power, since they have about the same damage. One particular observation, you can have haste and infuse it onto something so you yourself don't have to concentrate on it. Possibly good for hasting your fighter or paladin while also blurring yourself?

5) gun special actions are neat, but one of them starts at 4d6 and then suddenly increases to 4d6, and that's way too big of a jump. In all seriousness though, the rule seems to be that the gun gets to have more single target damage and more options for area damage, but much less utility than the alchemist. so your habitual assassin will probably pick gun, and your habitual wizard will probably pick up an alchemy bag.

6) spell list has a lot of utility, but aside from haste nothing screams "must pick" at me. shield of faith going on any of your allies concentration free seems neat, at least.



As far as these promised extra archetypes go, probably we can expect something with more sue out of their "animal" companion, (since as is it seems kind of... forced in?) maybe getting something cr 1/4 at level 1 and have the later abilities let you get higher CR stat blocks? or maybe start with some support abilities and have the late abilities give the companion the "sneak attack" damage boost that the current archetypes get naturally? There's a lot of good design space here to do what the beast master did wrong, and being on a 1/3 caster without extra attack I think it's probably safer to have a solid power level on it here. Think pathfinder summoner, except without the mook spam ability and less casting power.

[Joe the Rat]

It is sitting in an odd spot - definitely a 5th man, but can replace some rogue functions (locks and traps). And sweet Chauntea, Brewer's tools expertise!

Is their item creation set loosely by rarity? Because that seems to be what's happening here. Why else would the decanter of endless water come after the far more valuable jug of more than sufficient mayonnaise (and a couple of other substances like acid and poison)?

A little item creation, a little casting (and bombs or guns instead of cantrips - note!), and a means for temporary buffing magic item creation.


I just noticed that Infuse Spell only works on artificer spells. Should help reduce potential cheese, and answer questions about stuff like duration or concentration.My read on it is that concentration falls on the activator. It would take some work to have the multiple running buffs be too abusive, but the alternative is it using the Artificer's concentration, and you could shut off someone else's fly by activating your expeditious retreat.
But it is both cheese-limiting and disappointing that this is the case. It is also difficult to "abuse" this list by up-casting with a different class (though a spot of pact magic slots makes for short rest rechargable infusions).

So how exactly does "user activates the glyph of warding" work?

[BRC]

Anyone know what the intent is behind Infused items with regards to concentration? Does it take concentration when you cast it, or when the person holding it activates it? Or does it use their concentration? This massively affects how good it is.

Presumably, if the spell infused requires concentration, than the "Caster" (the one who used the item) must Concentrate as if they had cast the spell.

[Millstone85]

Does anyone else find it odd that the construct companion isn't immune to psychic damage? An enemy bard can insult it, a bunch of clockwork, to death.I am more surprised by the fact that it can be repaired with revivify. Both can probably be explained by the companion being a "living construct" like a warforged.

"Beep-boop tick-tock vrrrrrr?" (translation: "Still, why was I designed to feel pain?")

That's just the way of positive energy and all that jazz.


Anyone know what the intent is behind Infused items with regards to concentration? Does it take concentration when you cast it, or when the person holding it activates it? Or does it use their concentration? This massively affects how good it is.I would say the user of the item is considered to be the caster of the spell in every regard except the spellcasting ability. And even then, the user is required to have a minimum Int score of 6.

[Foxhound438]

Umm, does its special attacks work with Haste? Cause that would be kinda OP.

haste specifies what actions you can take with it, and the special actions are not those.

[jas61292]

Presumably, if the spell infused requires concentration, than the "Caster" (the one who used the item) must Concentrate as if they had cast the spell.

I believe that is how they have said normal magic items work, so this should be the same. If a spell needs concentration, that is never changed unless something specifically says so.

[ZX6Rob]

I really like the concept, but would prefer that they take the 6th level feature and spin it out into a third subclass. It seems weirdly out of place by itself and gets no real progression of its own.

I really like the gunsmith. Great way to handle that archetype.

[Joe the Rat]

I would say the user of the item is considered to be the caster of the spell in every regard except the spellcasting ability. And even then, the user is required to have a minimum Int score of 6.Are there any Large beasts with Int 6?

Asking for a friend.

[BRC]

I believe that is how they have said normal magic items work, so this should be the same. If a spell needs concentration, that is never changed unless something specifically says so.

Which is a bit awkward, since the Fighter is maintaining their own Fly spell, and they're more likely to get attacked. But, it also allows the Artificer to pass out multiple Fly spells to the party without a single failure point (The Wizard who cast it).

[Beleriphon]

It's nice to be able to play the locksmith without automatically going for rogue. Does anyone else find it odd that the construct companion isn't immune to psychic damage? An enemy bard can insult it, a bunch of clockwork, to death.
In any case, the idea looks fun. A nice utility character as a Rogue alternative or as a general fifth man. I wonder if there's a good flying mount candidate to match with the Gunsmith option (AFB currently).

It isn't just clockwork! Mr Clanks is a real lion! Look as he cries his oily tears at your insults!

[Regitnui]

The gunsmith subclass isn't necessarily very Eberron-y, or maybe I just didn't notice if guns are supposed to be a thing somewhere in the setting.

Well, they aren't.

However, looking at this, the Thunder Cannon the subclass revolves around is not a gun like modern American's cowboy totem, but an ancient Chinese fire lance (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_lance) that takes specialized training (hence, specialist artificer) to use without blowing your essentials off. So while they may exist in the world of Eberron, the eternal wand is a far safer and commonplace gun equivalent. The PC artificer who can build, maintain and properly use one of these Thunder Cannons is accorded much respect by other (npc) artificers who do not have the skill.

A few pictures to persuade those who'd rather have a modern pistol or shotgun:

http://mikelanceworldhistory.wikispaces.com/file/view/Firelance.png/277886576/346x272/Firelance.png
http://modernnotion.com/wp-content/uploads/fire-lance.jpg


I can see dwarves, gnomes, humans or warforged wielding those, while elves, tieflings, and shifters favour bows or wands. Honestly, the human armies of the Last War would have armed their mages with wands for general support fire and given these to specialized troops who broke armoured battalions or panicked cavalry.


The Gnomes of Lantan had guns in Forgotten Realms, hell even the Red Wizards of Thay had cannons.
but I'm so over Forgotten realms now.

And there's the other reason. FR has firearms, even though their (quite sensible) forge god keeps them from working. I object to recognizable Renaissance and later firearms in Eberron, because it robs the setting of a bit of magepunk, shifting to steampunk or serial-numbers-filed-off urban fantasy. These fire lances and grenades I have less trouble with, because they fit more into the magitech.

Fun Fact: were it not for Chinese alchemists stumbling onto gunpowder, the entire history of firearms would never have happened here. We only discovered that particular combination of chemicals once in human history, so we could have missed it entirely and still be fighting wars with infantry wielding swords and plate. A fantasy or alien civilization could advance ahead of us and never have developed guns at all.

[Arkhios]

Oh, wow!

Cunning you, you... you... well, Mearls and Crawford! Very Cunning of you to throw such a curve ball at us! Not that I was complaining... Oh, no!

It's also amazing to realize that the prestige class I made before this release fits like a glove on Artificer!

[VoxRationis]

Well, they aren't.

However, looking at this, the Thunder Cannon the subclass revolves around is not a gun like modern American's cowboy totem, but an ancient Chinese fire lance (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_lance) that takes specialized training (specialist artificer) to use without blowing your essentials off.

Really? I was taking a look at that bonus-action reload time and thinking a Winchester repeater was a perfect fit!

[Millstone85]

Are there any Large beasts with Int 6?

Asking for a friend.Pippin: Eagles! The eagles are coming! And they are wearing artificer gear!

The giant vulture too, if you want to be more edgy.

[8wGremlin]

Quetzalcoatlus (volo's) is a large beast, has fly, and flyby attack, plus 10' reach and a dive attack
Could be an interesting construct

(that's not the flying snake, that's the dinosaur)
or more like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7NZERuFNEw

Forget that, it's huge, not large

[Regitnui]

Really? I was taking a look at that bonus-action reload time and thinking a Winchester repeater was a perfect fit!

Your opinion, though magic can make a cannon or fire lance easily reloaded. They specify "powders" that set this off, not "gunpowder". Perhaps the artificers of House Cannith have a superior gunpowder-analogue that nobody in their world wants, so they use it for internal security or sell it to House Kundarak's special forces.

[Maxilian]

Is just me, or does the Alchemist is extremely weak in combat (compared to the Gunsmith)?

I mean... they need to use one action to retrieve the potion and one action to use it

[8wGremlin]

Is just me, or does the Alchemist is extremely weak in combat (compared to the Gunsmith)?

I mean... they need to use one action to retrieve the potion and one action to use it


As an action, you can reach into your Alchemist’s Satchel, pull out a vial ofvolatile liquid, and hurl the vial at a creature, object, or surface within 30 feet of you (the vial and its contents disappear if you don’t hurl the vial by the end of the current turn).

It's a combined action, they do both.

[Steel Mirror]

Your opinion, though magic can make a cannon or fire lance easily reloaded. They specify "powders" that set this off, not "gunpowder". Perhaps the artificers of House Cannith have a superior gunpowder-analogue that nobody in their world wants, so they use it for internal security or sell it to House Kundarak's special forces.As a completely tangential aside that doesn't really have much to do with this thread, if Cannith had a substance that wasn't just gunpowder, it was actually superior to gunpowder, I can't imagine them holding it back or other nations not jumping on it like a pack of starving kobolds on the last donkey leg in the dungeon. This is a world where the world just spent the last 100 years fighting a war, spending thousands of gold each on golem soldiers and unleashing hordes of undead on each other and worse. Cannith was the main death-mongers in that war, specifically sending artificers out to ancient places to dig up forbidden magics so as to make slaughter a more efficient and above all profitable endeavor. That's where creation forges came from, after all.

If they had gunpowder and it was powerful enough to rival the use of magic, the rest of Eberron would know about it. Hell, the leaders of the five nations would probably get brochures in the mail advertising 10 easy payments to get your own legion of fire-belching boomsticks.

That all said, I'm fine with the artificer class getting gunpowder-equivalent substances that work along the same lines as the alchemists' formulae. The artificer can make it and use it, but the stuff is inherently unstable and isn't easily used by others, so they can't mass produce it or sell it on the open market.

[Dualswinger]

I think the "multiple concentration" thing is intentional. I mean, the Artificer gets THREE SPELLS. That's it. So they've gotta count. At max, they get 4 level 1 spell slots, so they've gotta make those spells count. They have nothing in the way of direct damage, and their utility is... lacking, so the buffs are all they have truly. Even then, the buffs aren't the GREATEST buffs, so they aren't going to break the game for having multiple active at once, especially since they can't stack. Add into that the 8 hour limit on the "charges" and the use of those spells being mostly Less Than Hour buffs, and it adds up to multiple concentration slots being almost necessary IMHO

[Kileonhardt]

As much as I love the idea of a mechanical flying mount for raining down bullets, my first thought went to Allosaurus because dinosaurs make everything cooler.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Eberron Hobgoblin Artificers.

For the Dirge Singer!

[pwykersotz]

I have always hated artificers in 3.5. This class makes me rethink that hate. Well done WOTC, well done.

[Oramac]

So what's everyone's thoughts on being able to attune up to SIX magic items?

Depending on the items, that seems kinda OP to me.

[CursedRhubarb]

Looks like a fun class to try out. Having the companion will increase your damage output and not having to worry if it dies is nice since you can repair it over a long rest.

Myself, I'd lean more towards the Alchemist, I like the sound of it a bit more and the automatic max damage to objects with the acid vials is crazy. Pick the lock...What lock?

Also...a Half-Elf Alchemist Artificer that uses racial to grab Animal Handling and makes a Giant Eagle or Giant Vulture becomes the Green Goblin.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/66/Green_goblin2.jpg

[Trum4n1208]

So what do you all think the requirements and benefits of multi-classing would be to go into Artificer? I'm figuring INT 13 is the requirement, and either one skill or tool proficiency is your benefit (besides class features of course).

[VoxRationis]

Your opinion, though magic can make a cannon or fire lance easily reloaded. They specify "powders" that set this off, not "gunpowder". Perhaps the artificers of House Cannith have a superior gunpowder-analogue that nobody in their world wants, so they use it for internal security or sell it to House Kundarak's special forces.


As a completely tangential aside that doesn't really have much to do with this thread, if Cannith had a substance that wasn't just gunpowder, it was actually superior to gunpowder, I can't imagine them holding it back or other nations not jumping on it like a pack of starving kobolds on the last donkey leg in the dungeon.

...

If they had gunpowder and it was powerful enough to rival the use of magic, the rest of Eberron would know about it. Hell, the leaders of the five nations would probably get brochures in the mail advertising 10 easy payments to get your own legion of fire-belching boomsticks.

I am seconding the skepticism on "superior gunpowder-analogue that doesn't see field use." In any case, it wasn't the propellant that I was concerning myself with. It was more the reload time. Chinese fire lances don't reload quickly. I'm not even sure if they were supposed to be reloaded at all in the field. Being able to load another shot in the firearm in less time than it takes to snap off an aimed shot is not a characteristic of early firearm prototypes. Clearly the weapon is something more akin to a breech-loading rifle or perhaps a Minie ball-firing musket with some sort of self-cleaning powder than it is to a fire lance.

[Joe the Rat]

Also...a Half-Elf Alchemist Artificer that uses racial to grab Animal Handling and makes a Giant Eagle or Giant Vulture becomes the Green Goblin.
I know the actual form is cosmetic... but there are giant bats.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

So what's everyone's thoughts on being able to attune up to SIX magic items?

Depending on the items, that seems kinda OP to me.

Eh, the best items are either class-locked, or not really suited to them in the first place. Now, if they got UMD and could use a Staff of the Magi or something, we'd be talking...

And of course there's the problem of, you know, getting enough items to yourself to even do that. If you play through the published adventures, it's pretty unlikely even by the endgame that you'll have enough stuff to fill your attunement slots, let alone extra ones.

On looking further, I think I was a little hasty in saying this would have trouble finding a role, but I still think the class is a little lacking, particularly at higher levels, where it's not going to be able to match the martials for damage or the full casters for utility (particularly Gunsmiths). I really wish it had prepared spells and ritual casting, for example. And frankly I think you could expand them to 5th level casting without breaking anything. The Mechanical Servant really wants for some scaling, as well, if not to be pushed off to a subclass altogether - it's really good when you first get it, but at higher levels you might as well forget it exists as more than a pack mule.

[Joe the Rat]

Getting six magic items shouldn't be too difficult. They created five of them by that point. Six attunement might be a push...

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Getting six magic items shouldn't be too difficult. They created five of them by that point. Six attunement might be a push...

Yeah, but it's really attunement we're concerned with here, isn't it? The Artificer isn't any better at using non-attuned items than anyone else. Which is a bit meh, really.

[JumboWheat01]

I was not expecting the Artificer. This is nothing like DDO's, and I LOVE IT. And I love that it uses INT.

I'll have to try and convince my DM to let me give this class a swing.

[Kobard]

I like the general idea, but I find the subclasses somewhat off. Artificers weren't really a gun or alchemy class; they were the wand class. They crafted and carried wands out of the wazoo! There was even a wand-duelist prestige class meant for artificers.

[VoxRationis]

I was not expecting the Artificer. This is nothing like DDO's, and I LOVE IT. And I love that it uses INT.

I'll have to try and convince my DM to let me give this class a swing.

DDO's? I am unfamiliar with that term.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

DDO's? I am unfamiliar with that term.

D&D Online, I think. 'Tis an MMO.

[Garresh]

Am I the only one who thinks this class could be somewhat overpowered? It gets a ranger animal companion which stays competitive through mid levels, scaling cantrips which outdo actual cantrips, +6 to all saves, a metric crapton of tool utility, and some concentration shenanigans where buffs are concerned.

[jaappleton]

Yeah, but it's really attunement we're concerned with here, isn't it? The Artificer isn't any better at using non-attuned items than anyone else. Which is a bit meh, really.

Let's consider this.

Ioun Stones can help anyone.
Cloak of Protection helps anyone.
Ring of Protection helps anyone.
Winged Boots or Ring of Feather Falling would be great, since you'd likely want your pet to Fly and you don't want to go splat.
Gloves of Missile Snaring aren't bad, since you'll be in the back as a ranged character.
Amulet of Health helps anyone.
Headband of Intellect would be useful.
Mantle of Spell Resistance helps anyone.

That's 9 items from the DMG, all requiring Attunement, none above Very Rare.

Considering Ring of Protection and Cloak of Protection already grant +1 to AC and Saves... You'll be hard pressed to fail some saves.

[Foxhound438]

Are there any Large beasts with Int 6?

Asking for a friend.

not off the top of my head, but you can cast awaken on it, right?


Am I the only one who thinks this class could be somewhat overpowered? It gets a ranger animal companion which stays competitive through mid levels, scaling cantrips which outdo actual cantrips, +6 to all saves, a metric crapton of tool utility, and some concentration shenanigans where buffs are concerned.

1) the companion is on the strong side, but monsters are by design simple and thus don't bring a lot more than pure damage/hp

2) "scaling cantrips"? nah, man, sneak attack damage.

3) at level 20. not even bothered.

4) tool utility can be ground out by training proficiencies anyways, and even then it's rare to see significant use of them in a campaign

5) concentration shenanigans, yes, but on a 1/3 caster with the stipulation of only your artificier spells. nothing overpowered.

[jaappleton]

Am I the only one who thinks this class could be somewhat overpowered? It gets a ranger animal companion which stays competitive through mid levels, scaling cantrips which outdo actual cantrips, +6 to all saves, a metric crapton of tool utility, and some concentration shenanigans where buffs are concerned.

POTENTIALLY +6 to all saves. Potentially. At lv20, no less. At lv20, you're supposed to break a few things.

And yes, they out damage cantrips, but they're 1/3rd a spellcaster. Not full. Not even half.

And their buffs never exceed lv4 spells. They also have to burn a spell slot to Infuse.

Think of it this way: An Eldritch Knight, but instead of multiple attacks, they get better cantrips.

[jaappleton]

not off the top of my head, but you can cast awaken on it, right?

I believe Giant Eagles have an Int of 8.

http://www.orcpub.com/dungeons-and-dragons/5th-edition/monsters/giant-eagle

[Millstone85]

not off the top of my head, but you can cast awaken on it, right?
I believe Giant Eagles have an Int of 8.Giant Eagle has Int 8 and Giant Vulture has Int 6.
That's what my Pippin joke earlier was about

[JumboWheat01]

D&D Online, I think. 'Tis an MMO.

And currently my only experience with Eberron.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Let's consider this.

Ioun Stones can help anyone.
Cloak of Protection helps anyone.
Ring of Protection helps anyone.
Winged Boots or Ring of Feather Falling would be great, since you'd likely want your pet to Fly and you don't want to go splat.
Gloves of Missile Snaring aren't bad, since you'll be in the back as a ranged character.
Amulet of Health helps anyone.
Headband of Intellect would be useful.
Mantle of Spell Resistance helps anyone.

That's 9 items from the DMG, all requiring Attunement, none above Very Rare.

Considering Ring of Protection and Cloak of Protection already grant +1 to AC and Saves... You'll be hard pressed to fail some saves.

It's not the amount of items that could be found, it's the amount of items that are found. Both in my experience of playing generally, and in reading through the published adventures, you're not going to be finding a huge amount of attunement items. And bear in mind you're probably going to be sharing the loot with 2-5 other murderhobosfreelance acquisition and removal specialists. And that some of the loot will either be unusable by you (e.g. most staves), or far more useful to other members of the party (e.g. magic weapons). Now, even with that, you'll probably have at least 4 attunement items by level 20 (considering that you're probably carrying a few you crafted), but some of these are going to just be there because they fill a slot and are better than nothing, not anything to get excited over.Now, yes, you will have some badass saving throws at level 20, where most campaigns either never reach or only for a very short while. Don't get me wrong, it's a very nice capstone, but capstones aren't a particularly good metric for judging a class by.

[Shining Wrath]

Looks like a fun class to try out. Having the companion will increase your damage output and not having to worry if it dies is nice since you can repair it over a long rest.

Myself, I'd lean more towards the Alchemist, I like the sound of it a bit more and the automatic max damage to objects with the acid vials is crazy. Pick the lock...What lock?

Also...a Half-Elf Alchemist Artificer that uses racial to grab Animal Handling and makes a Giant Eagle or Giant Vulture becomes the Green Goblin.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/66/Green_goblin2.jpg

So the only way to stop him is ... a Druid wildshaped into a Giant Spider?

[jaappleton]

It's not the amount of items that could be found, it's the amount of items that are found. Both in my experience of playing generally, and in reading through the published adventures, you're not going to be finding a huge amount of attunement items. And bear in mind you're probably going to be sharing the loot with 2-5 other murderhobosfreelance acquisition and removal specialists. And that some of the loot will either be unusable by you (e.g. most staves), or far more useful to other members of the party (e.g. magic weapons). Now, even with that, you'll probably have at least 4 attunement items by level 20 (considering that you're probably carrying a few you crafted), which does mean that, yes, you will have some badass saving throws at level 20, where most campaigns either never reach or only for a very short while. Don't get me wrong, it's a very nice capstone, but capstones aren't a particularly good metric for judging a class by.

Oh, I agree. When selecting a class to play, I ignore the class and archetype capstone. I'm never going to get there. I figure the campaign will end by lv12 or 14, or my character will die by then, or the group will disband for whatever reason.

Aside from special one-shots, like "Let's kill a Tarrasque for lulz", I find its best to generally forget about capstones. I mean, it's the capstone. It's supposed to break the rules a bit, isn't it?

[thepsyker]

I really like the concept, but would prefer that they take the 6th level feature and spin it out into a third subclass. It seems weirdly out of place by itself and gets no real progression of its own.

I really like the gunsmith. Great way to handle that archetype.

Seems like it could be a pretty natural third subclass. Maybe give them find familiar as a ritual at 1st, with fluff that instead of a spirit you summon it is a construct you build. Some other thematic secondary level 1 ability and boost to the familar at third. At midlevel they get a boost for the level 6th construct. Then for the higher levels give them some abilities related to golems. Maybe let the upgrade their lv6 construct to a golem or use one of their created magic items to make a manual of golem control? Lots of thematic possibilities.

[jaappleton]

So the only way to stop him is ... a Druid wildshaped into a Giant Spider?

Like some sort of Man Spider? A spider-man hybrid of some kind?

[pwykersotz]

Like some sort of Man Spider? A spider-man hybrid of some kind?

Man-spider? KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/marveldatabase/images/b/ba/Man_spider_616.png/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/200?cb=20140712231408

[jaappleton]

Seems like it could be a pretty natural third subclass. Maybe give them find familiar as a ritual at 1st, with fluff that instead of a spirit you summon it is a construct you build. Some other thematic secondary level 1 ability and boost to the familar at third. At midlevel they get a boost for the level 6th construct. Then for the higher levels give them some abilities related to golems. Maybe let the upgrade their lv6 construct to a golem or use one of their created magic items to make a manual of golem control? Lots of thematic possibilities.

Oh they could TOTALLY have a Machinist subclass! One where your pet gets new abilities, scaling hit dice, etc. Similar to the Revised Ranger's Beast Master Conclave.

EDIT: This just gave me an idea for a NPC villain...

A giant, purple mechanical Ape named Magilla and his Gnome Gunsmith. The Ape uses his strength to barrel through walls while the Gunsmith performs hold ups.

[Nicrosil]

Looks like they made a stealth update; Piercing Round deals 4d6 damage at 14th level and 6d6 at 19th.

[CursedRhubarb]

So the only way to stop him is ... a Druid wildshaped into a Giant Spider?

Blast! You've found a weakness! He'll have to acid vial the web and rethink that approach. Hmmm....

[Syll]

I for one, groaned when I saw the title of the UA....

Only to become super excited when I saw what the subclasses were, and the toys they get. I'm really anxious to try this out (but I'm not sure if I like alch or gunslinger more)

[Draco4472]

Very interesting to see a class where having magic items are a class feature. Seems to also work like a better Beast-Master ranger too.

I'm not sure what to play first of the two archetypes. On one hand, throwing exploding vials seems like fun, however, a dwarven gunsmith riding a mechanical bear into battle sounds awesome.

This looks amazing.

[Stealthscout]

Looks like they got some of the basics right - you can pull off some batman moments without taking over the party, guaranteed to have some items, make item-based tricks (maybe a little too controlled, but it's UA), even a CR-2 mechanical monkey to play with. Good stuff.

I just gotta call out some big misses here:

Expertise in multiple tools is... strange. It just forced an artificer to pick lockpicks by default. If you made rolls for anything else, I would be intrigued by this ability. Missed a good opportunity here, guys.
Artifice is making things - you don't make anything. You have delayed spell effects and get some basic items at certain levels. But the choices may not fit your tools, and that is off. For example, I could spend my life at blacksmithing and metalurgy (with expertise!) and the best choice of items are all fine silks and cloth bags. Definitely not logical.
It relies on a campaign where you find magical items. If you don't, a major class ability is simply not used.
The character is still tied to permanent magical items that can be lost or given away. I don't expect a 5th ed game to go overboard like 3rd ed, but there is nothing stopping you from joining the party and dying to give out cool stuff (even accidentally) or losing your items and not being able to replace them without months of game time to do it. This is not a safe PC class, and requires some 'gentleman' rules from the DM to use.


Sorry, we could do better.

[Foxhound438]

Something possibly unintended: you don't have to see the creature you throw your acid vial at, so it's possible to hold the smoke stick (thus being heavily obscured and giving attacks against you disadvantage) and throw out vials with no accuracy penalty by RAW.

Something possibly worth exploring: the class has medium armor built in, so Vuman can have heavily armored and be more strength oriented. Not sure what exactly to do with that, but you have enhance ability on your spell list, so it's possible for an alchemist to take the grappler feat and restrain something to give them disad on the saves versus the acid you're probably pouring directly down their throat. Probably not the best action economy wise, but it's a start to something?


The latter of those came when looking through feats and wondering what would go well with them:

healer might be okay if you're expected to be a secondary support; mounted combatant might be useful if you want to take a beast companion with relatively low HP, and having advantage on attacks could be good for the gunsmith to ensure that you land your damage. Works on large creatures too if you cast enlarge on your mount; other go to's like resilient, observant, and lucky are all viable. past those, though, there's not a ton of feats that they play nice with.

[CursedRhubarb]

Was curious about the companions so started flipping through the MM to peek at constructs in there like golems or animated items it looks like they all have a thing called "Constructed Nature" and they don't need air, food, water, or sleep. I didn't see this mentioned in the UA so I'm curious if it would apply since it seems to be a Construct trait and they are Constructs instead of Beasts.

On another line of thought, what items do people think would be fun to make as an Artificer? A guaranteed Bag of Holding or Haversack would be great, but they seem less fun than others. Myself, I'd be after at least an Alchemy Jug, Decanter of Endless Water, and a Folding Boat.

Why the jug? Because every party has that guy that just needs 2 gallons of mayo to the face while they sleep. Sometimes it's you, normally it's the Wizard.

[DragonSorcererX]

OMG this version of the Artificer is AWESOME! While I was reading through it, it almost made shout: "Screw swords and axes, I want gun fantasy!"...

This is really good for my Homebrew Campaign Setting because my Gnomes were lacking an unique expertise, now I just need a decent Mystic for my Dark Elves and the Core Assumptions of my world will be basically complete (but an official Dragonfire Adept would be welcomed).

[jaappleton]

You essentially gain expertise in Tool Proficiency, right?

If I pick Brewer's Supplies, wouldn't that by proxy grand me permanent Advantage in Persuasion when dealing with Dwarves?

[Steampunkette]

Machinist Subclass ideas:

1st Level: Summon Familiar ritual (With a Bag of Parts)
1st Level: Able to spend a Bonus Action to make the Familiar attack.

3rd Level: Improve Familiar with more HP and your Int mod to damage

9th Level: Improve Mechanical Servant with more HP and Int mod to damage, grant it one of several abilities

14th Level: Use Bag of Parts to create some Swarms which fill squares you designate.

17th Level: Further Improvements and new abilities for both Familiar and Mechanical Servant.

Instead of getting a gun that deals 11d6 or a flask that deals 7d6 in an area, you wind up taking 3 "Turns". A personal (Probably Ranged, but maybe you'll smack 'em with a wrench) attack, your Familiar's attack, and then your Mechanical Servant attacks. Once you get into the higher levels, you make swarms of little robots that slow enemies down and do damage if the enemy is in that square at any point.

[GlenSmash!]

So the only way to stop him is ... a Druid wildshaped into a Giant Spider?

Spider Totem Barbarian.

[GlenSmash!]

Yeah, I agree with you. I'm not familiar with the witch hunter yet (Episode 20 as of now), but the gunslinger seems similar. Although i'd really like to get a more experienced player's opinions on which is a better one to pick.

Alchemist only bears the vaguest resemblance to one subclass of the Witch Hunter/Bloodhunter: the Order of the Mutant. The Bloodhunter is very much combat focused class. The alchemist much less so.

Gunslinger is mechanically very different since Mercer's Gunslinger is a fighter Archetype with expanded crit range. But they they do both make and shoot guns.

[Sigreid]

I don't hate this artificer but it might sound like it for a bit.

1. I find it mechanically odd that the artificer can pull out an endless number of healing potions, but an individual can only drink one per day. I'd have found it more natural for them to pull a limited number of them. As it's written, any army with an alchemist artificer will almost certainly beat an army without one.

2. I would have preferred that the mechanical pet be attached to it's own pet type artificer. One that does animated objects, golems and automatons.

3. I'm not a big fan of guns in D&D, but that's a small thing as I could easily change it to a wood carver expertise and make it a wand instead of a gun with no effort at all.

[DragonSorcererX]

Gunslinger is mechanically very different since Mercer's Gunslinger is a fighter Archetype with expanded crit range. But they they do both make and shoot guns.

It would be really cool to have a party of a Gunsmith Artificer, Alchemist Artificer, Fighter Gunslinger and another class that fits with the theme, maybe a Swashbuckler with the DMG Renassance Pistol or Musket (a VHuman with a Feat can get those if they are common).

[Theodoxus]

I like the alchemist - I'd be interested in playing one for a bit. I like the alchemist I wrote up when 5E first came out, using the warlock chassis, but people thought it was a bit too powerful, basing it on the PF version...

Essentially unlimited bombs though? The range is mediocre, but if you augment it with say, a decent ranged cantrip as a high elf... so you fire bolt or chill touch at longer range and switch to harder hitting bombs and acid vials at shorter range...

My potion rules use nearly the same rules for infusions - though they last forever, locking the spell slot for a number of weeks equal to their spell level... oh, and anyone with spell slots can craft them, provided they have a tome of alchemy...

[skaddix]

I appreciate them spinning Artificer out as a main class instead of Wizard Subclass.
Maybe not the greatest combat class but not everything needs to be minmax.
Now Do we do Rangers next or Mystic (Psion)?

[Foxhound438]

so for the other subclasses, I expect something with more to do with the companion for one, as we all suspect, and for another something to give the scaling totally not sneak attack in melee, perhaps by making body augmentations?

http://geekandsundry.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JPEG-Promo-15.jpg
(yes, Al is the mechanical companion)

[GlenSmash!]

I don't hate this artificer but it might sound like it for a bit.

1. I find it mechanically odd that the artificer can pull out an endless number of healing potions, but an individual can only drink one per day. I'd have found it more natural for them to pull a limited number of them. As it's written, any army with an alchemist artificer will almost certainly beat an army without one.

2. I would have preferred that the mechanical pet be attached to it's own pet type artificer. One that does animated objects, golems and automatons.

3. I'm not a big fan of guns in D&D, but that's a small thing as I could easily change it to a wood carver expertise and make it a wand instead of a gun with no effort at all.

I agree with all three points. Still i feel this was a big improvement over the last UA Artificer. Mainly because it actually it looks fun to play. Like I could totally make a Tony stark or Rocket Raccoon style artificer with this class.

[Temperjoke]

For those saying guns aren't part of Eberron, they might become a part of Eberron if 5e Eberron is set further in the timeline. I mean, if there was an increase in enemies that were immune to standard magic, I could imagine guns being developed to take the place of wands for regular troops. On the thieves tools proficiency, it's probably due to the fact that picking locks involves delicate tools manipulating an internal mechanism, so it'd probably be more weird if they weren't able to pick locks. Besides, half the time parties use less delicate methods to open locks anyways.

Infuse magic seems kind of weak at the moment, since it's requires Artificer spells with a very limited spell list, but then they might expand on that with one of the additional subclasses. The Alchemist subclass seems really unfinished as it stands now. You get stuff at level 1, and that's it, there aren't any more subclass abilities added to it.

[Squeeq]

I typed up a whole bunch about this but lost it, so it's the TL;DR version now

Base class: Fun! handy support magic items, firm support spell list, a place to put all the attunement magic items that are lower priority for other players, a helpful companion to carry things, attack, or act as a mount maybe. Fun skills, interesting saves, and ability to buff a fighter or non-concentration user without taking up your concentration stat.

Alchemist: Neat abilities to damage or minor battlefield control. Save attacks can be handy, but fire is not the best damage type to use. Decent at a whole lot of things.

Gunsmith: Good damage, great candidate for magic weapon or a dip for archery. Can target AC, Str, or Reflex saves to help increase chances of dealing actual damage. Single attack means it's fairly swingy, but good damage at high range is very handy. Thunder is a great damage type.

Overall: Can fit most roles besides frontliner. Thief's tools, magic items, and spell list encourages an A+ environmental explorer, goign underwater, up cliffs, through doors, gaseous form, etc. etc. Not quite a skill monkey, but reinforcing that with various spells and magical items and things. Gunner especially is a possible candidate for medium armor master to continue to be comparatively stealthy while moving ahead. I'd definitely play it.

[Foxhound438]

So does anyone else feel that there should be more options for the alchemist to take? as is you end up having all of them, and none of them are particularly powerful late game... it's like, you go into a new tier of adventuring, and the sorcerer learns meteor swarm, the fighter can now do 2 action surges in a row, and you get to... throw a bag of sticky fluid at someone? I mean, that's fine for laughs, but really? it's the same thing that the other alchemist got at level 1, with absolutely no change or improvement on it. I get that options are powerful in TTRPG's, but at least give us some choices to make.

[Steel Mirror]

For those saying guns aren't part of Eberron, they might become a part of Eberron if 5e Eberron is set further in the timeline. I mean, if there was an increase in enemies that were immune to standard magic, I could imagine guns being developed to take the place of wands for regular troops.
I really hope they don't advance the timeline; Eberron has gone through 2.5 editions so far without a timeline advance, and I don't think they need one.

If they did decide to got with a timeline advance, I'd at least give them the benefit of the doubt, but I don't think I've ever seen a campaign setting timeline advance that I liked. They always come across as either a ploy to get people to buy the new, updated version by consigning the stuff in old setting books to the dustbin of history, or attempts to justify changes to the mechanics of the game due to edition change by having some sort of massive, ham-fisted in-universe event arbitrarily modify the way the setting works (yeah I'm looking at you, Time of Troubles and Spellplague!). If that's what they did to Eberron, I'd be upset. If they instead took an opportunity to project out the lull in the Last War a few more years, maybe throw some further intrigue or even warfare between the Houses into the mix, and introduce a few more steampunk elements like primitive guns and so on, then I might be willing to be converted.

[tsuyoshikentsu]

Why yes I would like my Warlock/Artificer to have a pact Thunder Cannon

[Foxhound438]

Why yes I would like my Warlock/Artificer to have a pact Thunder Cannon

which brings up another fun interaction: you can infuse an artificer spell using a warlock spell slot, and then take a short rest, and still have the infused spell ready to go

not sure how good that is, but cheese is in fact possible.

[jas61292]

I know a lot of people are talking about wanting a mechanical servant based subclass, but I personally think that would be a bad idea, and hard to balance relative to the existing two subclasses. Not to mention that it would totally step on the feet of the beastmaster even more than it already does.

See, the thing is, role wise, this Artificer is not competing with the martial classes, nor the wizards or clerics of the world. No, its role is the same as that of the rogue, and that is what it is based off of. While it may be done in very different ways, both subclasses give main combat options which are mechanically speaking variations on sneak attack. Alchemist gets both "save based sneak attack" and "weaker save based sneak attack but with AOE" while the gunsmith gets "thunder (not so)-sneak attack."

Both have some advantages over sneak attack: you don't need advantage or an ally in melee with the target.

But both also have some disadvantages compared to sneak attack: the alchemist's has a small range compared to the rogue and is slightly weaker due to no base weapon damage. The gunsmith's requires your bonus action each turn to reload, and literally cannot be sneaky. And in both cases the sneak attack equivilant required a special action to do, and so you can't use TWF to get a second shot if you fail like a rogue could, and nor can you use it with an opportunity attack.

Overall though, while it might need a tweak here or there, it is clear that the artificer is designed with the combat role of strike damage in mind, like a rogue. And with that being the case, I really don't see a good way to make some sort of machinist subclass. The base class gets neither cantrips nor martial weapons to fall back on in combat, and their primary stat is Int, which cannot be used with the simple weapons they have, so without any sort of alpha strike option from a subclass, like the two existing ones have, it would lack anything to do round to round, other than what the mechanical servant does. And frankly, I cannot see any way to make a mechanical servant subclass that gives the servant something comparable. It is based on a beast, so it will fight like a beast, which makes it more comparable to a melee combatant like fighter, not a rogue.

Sure, there are subclasses that exist that are quite different, but any given class will always fall into a fairly similar role, at least between the classic party roles (warrior, thief, arcane caster, divine caster). I just don't see a real way to make the companion the focus without making it function radically different than the other subclasses, in a way that in incomparable to any other class.

[EvilAnagram]

This class is a breath of fresh air compared to those awful, bland paladin oaths last week. It's creative, balanced, and fun, and I absolutely love it.

My only question is whether the artificer or the person using the brazier of levitation maintains concentration.

[Kane0]

So does anyone else feel that there should be more options for the alchemist to take? as is you end up having all of them, and none of them are particularly powerful late game... it's like, you go into a new tier of adventuring, and the sorcerer learns meteor swarm, the fighter can now do 2 action surges in a row, and you get to... throw a bag of sticky fluid at someone? I mean, that's fine for laughs, but really? it's the same thing that the other alchemist got at level 1, with absolutely no change or improvement on it. I get that options are powerful in TTRPG's, but at least give us some choices to make.

Battlemasters have a similar problem. You take the best ones at the low levels and are stuck taking what's left later on because there isn't any higher tier options like Warlock Invocations.

[DragonSorcererX]

I really hope they don't advance the timeline; Eberron has gone through 2.5 editions so far without a timeline advance, and I don't think they need one.

If they did decide to got with a timeline advance, I'd at least give them the benefit of the doubt, but I don't think I've ever seen a campaign setting timeline advance that I liked. They always come across as either a ploy to get people to buy the new, updated version by consigning the stuff in old setting books to the dustbin of history, or attempts to justify changes to the mechanics of the game due to edition change by having some sort of massive, ham-fisted in-universe event arbitrarily modify the way the setting works (yeah I'm looking at you, Time of Troubles and Spellplague!). If that's what they did to Eberron, I'd be upset. If they instead took an opportunity to project out the lull in the Last War a few more years, maybe throw some further intrigue or even warfare between the Houses into the mix, and introduce a few more steampunk elements like primitive guns and so on, then I might be willing to be converted.

I think that they will do something like what they did in 4e but without Eladrin and with guns!

[Lonely Tylenol]

I kind of want to create subclasses for the Artificer revolving around being a mecha-tank (heavy armor user with limited offensive capabilities, perhaps built into the armor) as well as niche, possibly NPC, subclasses relating to siege engineering (perhaps revolving around the existing catapult, trebuchet, ballista, and battering ram) and vehicles (conferring special bonuses and abilities related to maneuvering and operating vehicles, which could include ships, land vehicles, airships, and their weaponry). Who's with me?

[Little boy]

Well, this is a surprise.

Interesting, but I'm struggling to see what role it would fit into in a normal party. I guess it makes a pretty decent B&E man with the automatic expertise in Thief's Tools. And if you took Forger's Kit and Disguise Kit, that makes you a darn good manipulator. Otherwise, though, it seems like it might have trouble finding a role.

This screams 5th player. It is less core and more polish. It looks like it could work amazingly well,

[Temperjoke]

I know a lot of people are talking about wanting a mechanical servant based subclass, but I personally think that would be a bad idea, and hard to balance relative to the existing two subclasses. Not to mention that it would totally step on the feet of the beastmaster even more than it already does.

See, the thing is, role wise, this Artificer is not competing with the martial classes, nor the wizards or clerics of the world. No, its role is the same as that of the rogue, and that is what it is based off of. While it may be done in very different ways, both subclasses give main combat options which are mechanically speaking variations on sneak attack. Alchemist gets both "save based sneak attack" and "weaker save based sneak attack but with AOE" while the gunsmith gets "thunder (not so)-sneak attack."

Both have some advantages over sneak attack: you don't need advantage or an ally in melee with the target.

But both also have some disadvantages compared to sneak attack: the alchemist's has a small range compared to the rogue and is slightly weaker due to no base weapon damage. The gunsmith's requires your bonus action each turn to reload, and literally cannot be sneaky. And in both cases the sneak attack equivilant required a special action to do, and so you can't use TWF to get a second shot if you fail like a rogue could, and nor can you use it with an opportunity attack.

Overall though, while it might need a tweak here or there, it is clear that the artificer is designed with the combat role of strike damage in mind, like a rogue. And with that being the case, I really don't see a good way to make some sort of machinist subclass. The base class gets neither cantrips nor martial weapons to fall back on in combat, and their primary stat is Int, which cannot be used with the simple weapons they have, so without any sort of alpha strike option from a subclass, like the two existing ones have, it would lack anything to do round to round, other than what the mechanical servant does. And frankly, I cannot see any way to make a mechanical servant subclass that gives the servant something comparable. It is based on a beast, so it will fight like a beast, which makes it more comparable to a melee combatant like fighter, not a rogue.

Sure, there are subclasses that exist that are quite different, but any given class will always fall into a fairly similar role, at least between the classic party roles (warrior, thief, arcane caster, divine caster). I just don't see a real way to make the companion the focus without making it function radically different than the other subclasses, in a way that in incomparable to any other class.

Except there are subclasses that expand your weapons and armor, even in the PHB classes, so a new subclass could easily add those in. The class itself gets a Large mechanical servant at 6th level, a subclass might get a medium-sized one early. It doesn't step on the Beastmaster, because the Beastmaster is more flexible, the pet has more options for healing than the Artificer Mechanical Servant gets (the text says nothing about healing options for it, only options for if it's "killed", which says to me that it doesn't recover lost HP, it just goes until it's out of HP and then you have to revive it somehow). They could also expand a subclass's spell list in a manner similar to druids, warlocks, and clerics, where only that subclass gets those particular spells.

Personally, I'd like to see a Artificer subclass that focuses around structures/vehicles. It might not be as effective in combat, but it might have some nice out of combat abilities, and it's not like Artificers don't get decent combat abilities as it is.

[D.U.P.A.]

The thing that is not clear to me, which attribute is used to attack with thunder cannon?

[Afgncaap5]

*Eagerly reads article*

Oooh... now that's more like it. I still don't feel like it's what I'd want, but it's definitely an artificer now instead of a wizard with the serial numbers filed off. I could accept this.

In fact, my only real problems are probably things I have to live with. "Magically creating bullets" feels a bit too much like they're hammering down on my flavor text (sort of like how I disliked the original Artificer's "you can infuse magic into a vial of water to make it a potion!" conceit), but it's definitely doable. I may have to ask my DM if I can swap in the sorcerer I just made to help test this thing out.

[jas61292]

Except there are subclasses that expand your weapons and armor, even in the PHB classes, so a new subclass could easily add those in. The class itself gets a Large mechanical servant at 6th level, a subclass might get a medium-sized one early. It doesn't step on the Beastmaster, because the Beastmaster is more flexible, the pet has more options for healing than the Artificer Mechanical Servant gets (the text says nothing about healing options for it, only options for if it's "killed", which says to me that it doesn't recover lost HP, it just goes until it's out of HP and then you have to revive it somehow). They could also expand a subclass's spell list in a manner similar to druids, warlocks, and clerics, where only that subclass gets those particular spells.

Personally, I'd like to see a Artificer subclass that focuses around structures/vehicles. It might not be as effective in combat, but it might have some nice out of combat abilities, and it's not like Artificers don't get decent combat abilities as it is.

But even with all that, what is its role? Whatever it is, it is not going to be the rogueish role of the other archetypes. Yes, war clerics get heavy armor and martial weapons as a part of their subclass, but they are still a divine caster first and foremost, not a warrior. Just like how an eldritch knight gets spells as part of its subclass, and yet it is still primarily a warrior, not an arcane caster. No matter which class you look at, and no matter how much of their key features are based on the main class or subclass, you will always find that all subclasses generally fill the same party role. Yeah, some can do more than one role decently, but their strongest point is always going to stay the same. Even something like a Valor bard which goes a long way towards gaining martial ability is still a spellcaster first and foremost. I simply do not see a good way for that to be the case with a mechanical servant based subclass for this artificer.

The ranger can get away with it because, while a ranger definitely has elements from multiple roles, its main focus, especially in combat, is that of the warrior. Their beast companion is also that of a warrior. The archetype just gives them a different way of filling largely the same role that they always fill. But with the artificer, their role, especially in combat, is that of the rogue. However, all of that combat ability is reliant on the subclass. Unless you completely change the way the mechanical servant functions to basically be a mini-rogue, doing this would change the classes entire role. It would be like if the rogue had a subclass that made it essentially a fighter. It is unprecedented in the game, and honestly, I think it would be bad game design.

[8wGremlin]

The thing that is not clear to me, which attribute is used to attack with thunder cannon?

It's a ranged weapon thus uses Dex under the rules in the Player's handbook.



Attack Rolls and Damage
You add your Dexterity modifier to your attack roll and your damage roll when attacking with a ranged weapon, such as a sling or a longbow. You can also add your Dexterity modifier to your attack roll and your damage roll when attacking with a melee weapon that has the finesse property, such as a dagger or a rapier.

[MrStabby]

I think this may be my least favourite UA, with the possible exception of the mass battles and alternative encounter building ones.

I dislike the style and I think this diminishes a lot of worlds in my eyes, not irrecoverable and fine if people agree to play in the setting I suppose. I think I would be a little uncomfortable if someone crashed a sword and sorcery campaign with a gun.

Mechanically it is mixed. Some random stuff in there - the alchemist seems pretty cool in parts but the gunsmith is uninspired. As noted, the pet is oddly unsupported and will just serve to drag out the character's turns.

Ah well. Lets hope for something better next time.

[Shriketalon]

This was quite an interesting surprise, and I'm glad to see the artificier getting the full class treatment. I really like a the subclass concepts and the idea of magical effects that are less reliant on once-per-day mechanics. An "all day long" caster is a cool class concept that doesn't really have any other niche.

That said, there are some rough spots that really need ironing out...

1) Alchemist utility needs to scale.

Creating a 10 foot square of difficult terrain at level 1 is cool. Creating a 10 foot square of difficult terrain at level 20 is utterly worthless. All alchemist items should scale up just like the fire and acid, with different effects at each tier (4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19).

For example, the tanglefoot bag might have the following properties. At 4th, it covers a 10 foot radius. At 7th level, creatures must make a saving throw or be grappled. At 10th level, the throwing range improves to 60 feet, and you can throw at opponents in the air. At 13th level, the radius becomes 15 feet. At 16th level, any creature failing the saving throw is restrained. At 19th level, the radius increases to 20 feet.

Scaling upwards is essential for keeping the utility options competitive. There are plenty of effects and conditions to apply to these items to keep them interesting (thunderstones that deafen, smoke sticks that blind the target even if they leave radius, etc).

2) Gunsmiths should get choices like Alchemists.

The gunsmith should be able to choose special shots as they level up and let them scale appropriately. There's no major balance concern with the choice between lightning bolt and fireball, thus a scaled down version of the explosive round at lower levels isn't going to be a problem. Just make sure that the radius improves with levels (no 30 foot sphere at level 3) and it will end up with a nicely balanced but versatile system.

3) Subclasses should be like wizards. You should be able to learn everything.

Let alchemists treat potions like spell scrolls for wizards, learning special effects by encountering potions in the field. Let gunsmiths tinker with magical ammo and special weapons to learn magical bullets. The entire point of an alchemist is discovery and invention, and just like a wizard discovering new spells, they shouldn't be restricted by a maximum number of potions/bullets known.

They could easily have a limit on the number of special items to prepare each day (which fits the artificing theme), just like a wizard, but the player should be actively seeking out and discovering new magic to fold into their arsenal.

4) Mechanists should be a subclass.

It's been mentioned already, but I want to throw in my vote towards a golemancer. The mechanical servant's complete lack of scaling means it will be a godlike power at level 6, and gradually wane into uselessness as the damage vastly overtakes its HP and its low attack bonus prevents it from hitting.

But a golemancer/mechanist subclass would be absolutely amazing. Customize your construct with a series of upgrade choices just like the alchemist/gunsmith abilities. Choose from a myriad of forms to suit your situation. Infuse your monstrosity with magical energy and command it to devastate your foes. This is madness! This is science!

5) The magic item class feature isn't good design.

You should never give a player a class feature that can be permanently taken away. I get that the artificier needs magic items to function, but flat out giving them items is flawed. Not only is the "we assume you've been working on this" flavor really boring, but it simply has no solution for what happens if someone loots your corpse.

Instead, the Infusion concept should be expanded to allow creating temporary magic items. Go down the list of artificier spells and link each one to a corresponding item. During a long rest, the player can infuse some of their slots into a piece of equipment to allow it to act like that magic item for 24 hours or until the alchemist completes another long rest. For example, if you know spider climb, you can infuse slippers of spider climbing. If you know magic weapon, you can infuse a weapon with magic.

A system like this will allow the artificier's class features that depend on magic items to function, without worrying about the stupid but completely plausible scenario of "I was incapacitated and the baddies looted my magic items. I can never get those class features back, ever".

[DragonSorcererX]

In fact, my only real problems are probably things I have to live with. "Magically creating bullets" feels a bit too much like they're hammering down on my flavor text (sort of like how I disliked the original Artificer's "you can infuse magic into a vial of water to make it a potion!" conceit), but it's definitely doable. I may have to ask my DM if I can swap in the sorcerer I just made to help test this thing out.

Wait... It really magically creates bullets! OMG! I LOVE THIS CLASS EVEN MORE! HIGH MAGIC INTENSIFIES!!!

If it loses this feature in the final version I will not miss it much, but, as it is right now it is AWESOME!

[Slayn82]

Why yes I would like my Warlock/Artificer to have a pact Thunder Cannon

Is he a Warforged Warlock/Artificer with Repelling Blast? Something like Iron Man, his Proton Cannon and a Hulk Buster suit?

(I would post an image, but linking from cellphone has become a very frustrating exercise lately)

[Dualswinger]

I think this may be my least favourite UA, with the possible exception of the mass battles and alternative encounter building ones.

I dislike the style and I think this diminishes a lot of worlds in my eyes, not irrecoverable and fine if people agree to play in the setting I suppose. I think I would be a little uncomfortable if someone crashed a sword and sorcery campaign with a gun.

Mechanically it is mixed. Some random stuff in there - the alchemist seems pretty cool in parts but the gunsmith is uninspired. As noted, the pet is oddly unsupported and will just serve to drag out the character's turns.

Ah well. Lets hope for something better next time.

I fully understand your viewpoint, but I wonder how you (and other such players who didn't like the concept) would feel if the weapon was never outright referred to as a "gun" and as some other thing, for example, "Portable Spell Cannon" or "Staff of blasting". I'm not trying to invalidate your objection, but would a reskin help the dissonance you feel at the mixing of tech levels?

[Squeeq]

This screams 5th player. It is less core and more polish. It looks like it could work amazingly well,

For a second I thought you meant that the comment in question screamed out that the commenter was a 5th edition player as though it was some sort of derogatory remark and was trying to figure it out for ages until I realized you meant a 5th wheel in the character party! That said, I 100% agree, and could even see it partially taking over as a 4th character in place of a rogue or mage since it kind of does either of them to a decent degree.

[Steel Mirror]

I fully understand your viewpoint, but I wonder how you (and other such players who didn't like the concept) would feel if the weapon was never outright referred to as a "gun" and as some other thing, for example, "Portable Spell Cannon" or "Staff of blasting". I'm not trying to invalidate your objection, but would a reskin help the dissonance you feel at the mixing of tech levels?
Somebody already mentioned it upthread, and I agree that reskinning the gun into a blasting wand would not only bring the class more in line for people who don't want guns in their fantasy, but also be a pleasing nod to the blasting wand-ificers that I remember running across frequently back in 3.5. As far as I can tell, the reskin is pretty easy, since the gun already operates more as an extension of the character than as an independent invention usable by others in its own right.

[Sigreid]

For those saying guns aren't part of Eberron, they might become a part of Eberron if 5e Eberron is set further in the timeline. I mean, if there was an increase in enemies that were immune to standard magic, I could imagine guns being developed to take the place of wands for regular troops. On the thieves tools proficiency, it's probably due to the fact that picking locks involves delicate tools manipulating an internal mechanism, so it'd probably be more weird if they weren't able to pick locks. Besides, half the time parties use less delicate methods to open locks anyways.

Infuse magic seems kind of weak at the moment, since it's requires Artificer spells with a very limited spell list, but then they might expand on that with one of the additional subclasses. The Alchemist subclass seems really unfinished as it stands now. You get stuff at level 1, and that's it, there aren't any more subclass abilities added to it.

I don't really know anything about Eberron that I haven't read on this forum. Guns just aren't D&D for me.

[Squiddish]

Just a helpful little reminder for the people who resent the tech level dissonance with the gunsmith: it mentions that the Thunder Cannon is a mix of magic and tech. The exact ratio is left up to the player and/or the DM. If you want to say the only tech is making the thing survive the explosions, that's fine. If you want to say the only magic is keeping the gunpowder stable, that's also fine.

[MrStabby]

I fully understand your viewpoint, but I wonder how you (and other such players who didn't like the concept) would feel if the weapon was never outright referred to as a "gun" and as some other thing, for example, "Portable Spell Cannon" or "Staff of blasting". I'm not trying to invalidate your objection, but would a reskin help the dissonance you feel at the mixing of tech levels?

It would help - certainly, a staff of blasting wouldn't worry me. If it also used a casting stat rather than dex as the attack stat it would almost be fine.

[DragonSorcererX]

It would help - certainly, a staff of blasting wouldn't worry me. If it also used a casting stat rather than dex as the attack stat it would almost be fine.

If you are playing on a Sword and Sorcery, you don't need to make the Thunder Canon a gun, but you could refluff the Artificer as some kind of magical archeologist and the Thunder Canon is a piece of ancient/alien tech that he managed to do a reverse engineering, but, since it is Sword and Sorcery, this guy would be unique and would probably be a villain because anyone who deals with alien stuff in these kind of settings is a villain (are you talking about Lankhmar and stuff like that? Because when I think Sword and Sorcery I think Conan)...

[tsuyoshikentsu]

I don't really know anything about Eberron that I haven't read on this forum. Guns just aren't D&D for me.

Then you don't play in Forgotten Realms or Ravenloft, both of which have them. Old, unreliable ones, but they're there.

Honestly, this is less of a personal firearm than a cannon.

[Sigreid]

Then you don't play in Forgotten Realms or Ravenloft, both of which have them. Old, unreliable ones, but they're there.

Honestly, this is less of a personal firearm than a cannon.

Just very old school.

[Vogonjeltz]

They threw us a curve ball!

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/artificer

And to everyone who said, "Oh, we're not getting Eberron..."

-MIC DROP-

I doubt I'm the first to notice this, but this is basically Indiana Jones the character class (which is a good thing), I mean rivalries is straight up from Raiders of the Lost Ark as are the motivations to seek out lost wondrous items and so forth.

[SharkForce]

definitely a step in the right direction. there are a few things i'm not totally satisfied with (i'd like the utility alchemist abilities to scale a bit better, and i'd like the guns to have some more utility and actually be able to pick. also, this class really should have use magic device, it was basically a core part of the class's identity, and i'd rather see it as a half-caster than a 1/3 caster). but it's very close.

(and the guns can pretty easily be reflavoured as wands, if it particularly bothers you... it would change things a bit, but i don't think it would break much even if you just allowed them to treat it as a spell attack instead of a weapon attack).

[Tectorman]

Read it. Loved it.

Question: All those variation blasts for the Gunsmith aren't normal attacks. Do they still take the Thunder Cannon's ammo per shot? I.e., at the beginning of the day, when you have 40 rounds to start with, do Thunder Mongers/Blast Waves/etc count against those rounds?

[Flashy]

definitely a step in the right direction. there are a few things i'm not totally satisfied with (i'd like the utility alchemist abilities to scale a bit better, and i'd like the guns to have some more utility and actually be able to pick. also, this class really should have use magic device, it was basically a core part of the class's identity, and i'd rather see it as a half-caster than a 1/3 caster). but it's very close.

(and the guns can pretty easily be reflavoured as wands, if it particularly bothers you... it would change things a bit, but i don't think it would break much even if you just allowed them to treat it as a spell attack instead of a weapon attack).

Eh, in 5e the Spellcasting feature covers 90% of Use Magic Device anyway. The only things Artificers can't use are staves, a handful of items that don't do anything for them anyway (rod of the pact keeper, etc), and one or two niche items like the holy avenger. It'd maybe be a thematic ribbon, but it'll come up so rarely that I doubt it will matter.

[Milo v3]

Because I love playing crafting characters one of my mates told me 5e finally got around to making an artificer class... and now I'm disappointed... "oh yay, I get to craft one thing every five levels off a tiny list". :smallsigh:

[Vogonjeltz]

Read it. Loved it.

Question: All those variation blasts for the Gunsmith aren't normal attacks. Do they still take the Thunder Cannon's ammo per shot? I.e., at the beginning of the day, when you have 40 rounds to start with, do Thunder Mongers/Blast Waves/etc count against those rounds?

I'd assume the answer is supposed to be yes. Since the special attacks all deal more damage, it wouldn't make much sense that only the basic attack is ammunition limited.

That being said, it doesn't say that there's any limit on ammo, so you could theoretically have hundreds of rounds stockpiled.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Here's what I'm thinking so far on the mech-tank. Bear in mind, I'm just spitballing some early ideas:

Mechanist
A mechanist is a master craftsman who believes in augmenting personal power with advanced armor and weaponry creating an amalgam of man and machinery more powerful than either.

Armor Master
When you choose this specialization at 1st level, you gain proficiency in smith's tools, as well as proficiency in heavy armor.

Armored Mech
At 1st level, you forge a powerful suit of armor using your mastery of smithing and arcana which augments your natural abilities, which you alone are proficient with. This suit of armor is called an Armored Mech. It is the pinnacle of magic and technology married into one, and enables certain powers beyond your normal ability.
While you are wearing the armored mech, you gain the following special attacks:
Power Fist: While you are wearing your armored mech, your unarmed strikes deal damage equal to 1d8 + your Strength modifier. At 5th level, you gain the Extra Attack feature when using your armored mech to attack. At 11th level, you add your Intelligence modifier to attacks made with your armored mech.
Force Missiles: While you are wearing your armored mech, as an action, you can launch a missile of pure force at a target you can see within 120 feet as a ranged spell attack. The attack deals 1d8 force damage on a hit. This damage increases by 1d8 when you reach certain levels in this class: 5th level (2d8), 9th level (3d8), 13th level (4d8), and 17th level (5d8). At 11th level, you add your Intelligence modifier to damage dealt with this attack. (I'm still struggling with this... I want it to be less offensively rewarding than the boomstick, since it's better defensively, but it feels too toned down. I am also considering an "expanded spell list" or spell-like ability option, with an offensive cantrip and a few attack spells, but that feels lazy and limited in application.)
The armored mech begins play with the statistics of a suit of half plate. You may spend one week of work (eight hours each day) and 750 gp of raw materials to upgrade your armored mech to a suit of full plate. If your armored mech is destroyed, you can spend one week of work (eight hours each day) to rebuild a new one with the following cost in raw materials: 750 gp for a half plate, and 1,500 gp for a full plate.

Mechanical Infusion
At 3rd level, you gain the ability to cast a special ritual which infuses your armored mech with a portion of your arcane energy. You can spend 10 minutes and one of your spell slots to grant your armored mech a bonus to Armor Class equal to the level of the spell slot expended for 8 hours. In addition, you gain a bonus to hit and damage equal to the level of the spell slot expended. Your armored mech is considered magic during this time. Once you perform the ritual, you cannot do so again until you have completed a long rest.

Reinforced Plating
At 9th level, you refine your armorsmithing technique to the point where your armor becomes extremely resilient to blows. While you are wearing your armored mech, you gain resistance to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage. At 17th level, you become resistant to all bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage. (Might be overpowered to give resistance like this? My other thought was to give resistance to one type at a time, at 9th/13th/17th, or to reduce damage of those types by twice the value of the armor's magical bonus, a la Heavy Armor Master. Thoughts?)

Arcane Propulsion
At 14th level, you are able to infuse your armored mech with enough magical energy for sustained propulsion. While you are wearing your armored mech, you gain a flight speed equal to your walking speed.

Self-Destruct Mechanism
At 19th level, you are able to release the energy contained within your armored mech in a final, destructive burst. As an action, you can activate your armored mech's self-destruct mechanism, which initiates at the end of your turn. Enemies within a 20-foot radius of the explosion must make a Constitution save equal to 8 + your proficiency bonus + your Intelligence modifier. On a failed save, a creature takes 10d6 thunder damage and 10d6 force damage, is pushed to the nearest open square outside the explosion's radius, and is knocked prone unless it is in flight. On a successful save, the creature takes half as much damage and is not pushed or knocked prone.
Additionally, you are able to eject from your armored mech as a bonus action.

------

Thoughts? I know this is more home brew than anything else, but I'm still spitballing at this point, and since people are already discussing ideas for Artificer subclasses here, I figured why not.

[MeeposFire]

Anybody else notice that thier last ASI comes at level 18 instead of 19? I think they wanted to make sure that they wanted to avoid giving an ability at the same time as their last spell level though I think that is kind of silly.

[SharkForce]

Eh, in 5e the Spellcasting feature covers 90% of Use Magic Device anyway. The only things Artificers can't use are staves, a handful of items that don't do anything for them anyway (rod of the pact keeper, etc), and one or two niche items like the holy avenger. It'd maybe be a thematic ribbon, but it'll come up so rarely that I doubt it will matter.

there are also alignment-limited items, racial-limited items, at least one limited by deity worshipped, and a handful of class restricted ones (instruments of the bard, robe of the archmagi, rod of resurrection) that could be highly useful.

and, of course, every staff (as you mentioned), which is pretty significant.

[Matticusrex]

With a few scaling buffs on the attacks and pet, this class could be viable.

[DracoKnight]

Anybody else notice that thier last ASI comes at level 18 instead of 19? I think they wanted to make sure that they wanted to avoid giving an ability at the same time as their last spell level though I think that is kind of silly.

I think it was mainly to avoid a dead level, but yeah. It's silly. I would leave it at 19th, and give them Use Magic Device, or something similar, at 18th.

[Vogonjeltz]

Here's what I'm thinking so far on the mech-tank. Bear in mind, I'm just spitballing some early ideas:

Mechanist
A mechanist is a master craftsman who believes in augmenting personal power with advanced armor and weaponry creating an amalgam of man and machinery more powerful than either.

Armor Master
When you choose this specialization at 1st level, you gain proficiency in smith's tools, as well as proficiency in heavy armor.

Armored Mech
At 1st level, you forge a powerful suit of armor using your mastery of smithing and arcana which augments your natural abilities, which you alone are proficient with. This suit of armor is called an Armored Mech. It is the pinnacle of magic and technology married into one, and enables certain powers beyond your normal ability.
While you are wearing the armored mech, you gain the following special attacks:
Power Fist: While you are wearing your armored mech, your unarmed strikes deal damage equal to 1d8 + your Strength modifier. At 5th level, you gain the Extra Attack feature when using your armored mech to attack. At 11th level, you add your Intelligence modifier to attacks made with your armored mech.
Force Missiles: While you are wearing your armored mech, as an action, you can launch a missile of pure force at a target you can see within 120 feet as a ranged spell attack. The attack deals 1d8 force damage on a hit. This damage increases by 1d8 when you reach certain levels in this class: 5th level (2d8), 9th level (3d8), 13th level (4d8), and 17th level (5d8). At 11th level, you add your Intelligence modifier to damage dealt with this attack. (I'm still struggling with this... I want it to be less offensively rewarding than the boomstick, since it's better defensively, but it feels too toned down. I am also considering an "expanded spell list" or spell-like ability option, with an offensive cantrip and a few attack spells, but that feels lazy and limited in application.)
The armored mech begins play with the statistics of a suit of half plate. You may spend one week of work (eight hours each day) and 750 gp of raw materials to upgrade your armored mech to a suit of full plate. If your armored mech is destroyed, you can spend one week of work (eight hours each day) to rebuild a new one with the following cost in raw materials: 750 gp for a half plate, and 1,500 gp for a full plate.

Mechanical Infusion
At 3rd level, you gain the ability to cast a special ritual which infuses your armored mech with a portion of your arcane energy. You can spend 10 minutes and one of your spell slots to grant your armored mech a bonus to Armor Class equal to the level of the spell slot expended for 8 hours. In addition, you gain a bonus to hit and damage equal to the level of the spell slot expended. Your armored mech is considered magic during this time. Once you perform the ritual, you cannot do so again until you have completed a long rest.

Reinforced Plating
At 9th level, you refine your armorsmithing technique to the point where your armor becomes extremely resilient to blows. While you are wearing your armored mech, you gain resistance to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage. At 17th level, you become resistant to all bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage. (Might be overpowered to give resistance like this? My other thought was to give resistance to one type at a time, at 9th/13th/17th, or to reduce damage of those types by twice the value of the armor's magical bonus, a la Heavy Armor Master. Thoughts?)

Arcane Propulsion
At 14th level, you are able to infuse your armored mech with enough magical energy for sustained propulsion. While you are wearing your armored mech, you gain a flight speed equal to your walking speed.

Self-Destruct Mechanism
At 19th level, you are able to release the energy contained within your armored mech in a final, destructive burst. As an action, you can activate your armored mech's self-destruct mechanism, which initiates at the end of your turn. Enemies within a 20-foot radius of the explosion must make a Constitution save equal to 8 + your proficiency bonus + your Intelligence modifier. On a failed save, a creature takes 10d6 thunder damage and 10d6 force damage, is pushed to the nearest open square outside the explosion's radius, and is knocked prone unless it is in flight. On a successful save, the creature takes half as much damage and is not pushed or knocked prone.
Additionally, you are able to eject from your armored mech as a bonus action.

------

Thoughts? I know this is more home brew than anything else, but I'm still spitballing at this point, and since people are already discussing ideas for Artificer subclasses here, I figured why not.

So it starts with free half plate (better than any other class), gets an unarmed attack better than a monk starts with and a ranged attack equivalent to an evoker (adds int) and that deals force damage (resisted by next to nothing) and later on the class gains resistance to many common damage types as if it had barbarian rage up at all times AND there's seemingly no method of the armor being damaged except by the wearer at very high levels. Oh and not to mention flight. Basically the nicest toys from every other class.

Yes its overpowered in the current incarnation and it should be renamed the Mary Sue Power Armor.

[Grey Watcher]

I think it was mainly to avoid a dead level, but yeah. It's silly. I would leave it at 19th, and give them Use Magic Device, or something similar, at 18th.

(Emphasis mine.)

Actually, now that you mention it, how does a class whose whole shtick is "MAGIC ITEMS!" up to and including breaking the rules about attunement limits not have this?

The "user only" limitation on passing out free temporary magic items to your friends is a bit bizarre when you think about weapons. You can't put any offensive type things on them. (Yes, functionally, your friends will probably spend an attunement on their weapon, knowing that you can always give them no-attunement-necessary, single-use Boots of Haste or Rings of Invisibility or whatever, so it probably wouldn't matter much in actual play. But still.)

...

Actually, scratch that: giving your friend a Sword of Sleep sounds like the most hilariously cruel and ill-timed prank ever.

Also, does this mean Use Activated True Strike weapons can be a thing?

[xyianth]

*blinks*

*reads it again*

Ok... is it just me or is this class ridiculously OP compared to the classes in the PHB?

First, the biggest offense: infuse magic. Doesn't this ability allow artificers to break the whole 1 concentration effect thing? Where are all the torches and pitchforks over the casual ability to bypass that sacred cow? Every time I've even hinted at an ability to concentrate on two things at once in my homebrew threads the number of complaints that get raised is incredible. This does it up to Int mod things at once. This also lets you take advantage of other people's concentration slot which is incredible.

Next the chassis: d8 hp, con(!) and int saves, three tools, three skills, automatic expertise in the tools(!), free magic items, bypassing the attunement limits of magic items(!), a free CR 2 large mechanical pet, 1/3 caster, and a capstone that is insanely good. So I guess this class is only for games with magic items included... oh well. But seriously this sounds like a sorcerer + rogue + ranger multiclass all rolled into one class so ASI delay and MAD requirements vanish.

Then the subclasses. Both of them get at-will abilities that do rogue sneak attack level damage, without needing to qualify for sneak attacks, at range. Alchemist gets a bunch of useful potions and bombs while gunsmith gets a very powerful ranged weapon. Both are given as practically at-will bonuses.

Even single classed, I see almost no reason why anyone would play: arcane trickster, eldritch knight, or ranger(any) if this class were available. And multiclassed this thing opens up a bunch of abuse:

chain warlock 3: 2x pact magic slots to infuse into items then short rest recover them + a familiar to use your infused items. This allows you to cast spells as a free(!) action, bypassing the restriction on only 1 spell per round that isn't a cantrip(!) and allowing your familiar to concentrate on it for you(!). Who needs quicken spell?
thief rogue 3: speaking of quicken spell, thieves can use an object as a bonus action. You make spells into objects. Free quicken spell all day long right here.
druid 2: wild shaping doesn't affect your int score, enjoy casting spells from your items while wild shaped.


Don't get me wrong, I LOVE this class and would be thrilled to play one. But I have a feeling that this will be banned from most tables. (just like the theurge tradition wizard, undying light warlock, and sharpshooter fighter)

Please tell me I'm wrong and am just misreading the class or something.

[Malifice]

Looks like they got some of the basics right - you can pull off some batman moments without taking over the party, guaranteed to have some items, make item-based tricks (maybe a little too controlled, but it's UA), even a CR-2 mechanical monkey to play with. Good stuff.

I just gotta call out some big misses here:

Expertise in multiple tools is... strange. It just forced an artificer to pick lockpicks by default. If you made rolls for anything else, I would be intrigued by this ability. Missed a good opportunity here, guys.
Artifice is making things - you don't make anything. You have delayed spell effects and get some basic items at certain levels. But the choices may not fit your tools, and that is off. For example, I could spend my life at blacksmithing and metalurgy (with expertise!) and the best choice of items are all fine silks and cloth bags. Definitely not logical.
It relies on a campaign where you find magical items. If you don't, a major class ability is simply not used.
The character is still tied to permanent magical items that can be lost or given away. I don't expect a 5th ed game to go overboard like 3rd ed, but there is nothing stopping you from joining the party and dying to give out cool stuff (even accidentally) or losing your items and not being able to replace them without months of game time to do it. This is not a safe PC class, and requires some 'gentleman' rules from the DM to use.


Sorry, we could do better.

The class makes its own items (from a limited list). Also there are rules in the downtime section of the DMG for making more.

[Grey Watcher]

Yes its overpowered in the current incarnation and it should be renamed the Mary Sue Power Armor.

This is Unearthed Arcana we're talking about, the same article that brought you Wizards "dabbling" in Cleric Domains who somehow get the Domain capstone a full three levels before the Clerics, who are supposed to be the specialists. Any game balance in the content is purely coincidental.

Snarkiness aside, these are rough- (in some cases cleary first-)drafts that they're publishing to get player feedback and drive up site traffic.

I think, much as I thought with the School of Theurgy Wizard, there's enough here to work with that you can get to a decent end product. I, for example, would probably strip the base class (not including subclasses) of everything except the "handing out magic items like candy on Halloween" part. Maybe steal the Thief's Use Magic Device. Anything and everything else should be shunted to subclasses: robo-puppy, the magical bazooka, attuning to more items, and such should be what you build each subclass around.

EDIT: 5 points from Hufflepuff for not paying attention to what I'm reading. Original text left here for context purposes and as a dire warning to all who would walk that dark path.

[Milo v3]

This is Unearthed Arcana we're talking about, the same article that brought you Wizards "dabbling" in Cleric Domains who somehow get the Domain capstone a full three levels before the Clerics, who are supposed to be the specialists. Any game balance in the content is purely coincidental.

Snarkiness aside, these are rough- (in some cases cleary first-)drafts that they're publishing to get player feedback and drive up site traffic.
The person you're quoting is responding to someone's homebrew, not part of the UA article.

[Afgncaap5]

Because I love playing crafting characters one of my mates told me 5e finally got around to making an artificer class... and now I'm disappointed... "oh yay, I get to craft one thing every five levels off a tiny list". :smallsigh:

I'm a little foggy on my 5e crafting, but isn't the crafting system in 5e more or less assumed as an off-screen thing? Like, if a person says "I'd like my warlock to craft a a dagger that returns to my hand when I throw it if I reveal a personal secret about myself on each use", isn't it just a question of the DM checking to see if they've got enough free time and resources to pull it off without breaking the world's verisimilitude?

The artificer feels like it could build off of that. In addition to the regular crafting that any class gets, the artificer also has some guaranteed inventions that they can pull into play even if they've not reasonably had much down time in the story.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Yes its overpowered in the current incarnation and it should be renamed the Mary Sue Power Armor.

Constructive.


So it starts with free half plate (better than any other class)

Gunslinger starts with a free ranged Greatsword with level scaling. Alchemist starts with a pouch of (alchemical attack and healing options), also with phenomenal level scaling. The class is literally gifted five magical items as a class feature, starting at level two. It's... Kind of this class's thing, in all incarnations.

For all intents and purposes, half plate is worse to start with than chain mail for a DEX-dumping character (its attack options are Strength-based and its spell options are Intelligence-based, and then there's Constitution). If I wanted to make it explicitly a power option, I'd have made it chain mail; it is half plate purely for the sake of cost.


gets an unarmed attack better than a monk starts with

...With neither the scaling options or quality utility of a monk's Flurry of Blows...

You are also calling overpowered a primary attack form, which gets 1d8+Strength at melee range a maximum of twice with level scaling, plus rider damage at level 11 (essentially the barest minimum a melee can have to be considered melee), when the first level feature of the Alchemist and Gunslinger literally give ranged sneak attack-scaling damage with energy types at 1st-level, with no justification thereof, so... I'm honestly looking for constructive criticism here, so can you explain your reasoning?


and a ranged attack equivalent to an evoker (adds int) and that deals force damage (resisted by next to nothing)

Equivalent to a cantrip with slightly different scaling in exchange for being class-dependent, also as a primary damage option for a class with no other damage options (aside from Power Fist). Compare and contrast with Warlock's cantrip options (Eldritch Blast, with better dice and gaining CHA to damage on each blast 9 levels earlier without a level cost) and Wizard's spell options. Compare also, again, with the at-will damage options of Alchemist and Gunslinger. The only thing I am sketch on is force damage, and that's something I'm not sold on.


and later on the class gains resistance to many common damage types as if it had barbarian rage up at all times

8 levels later than Barbarian rage, it gains an inferior form of resistance (Barbarian rage resists magical damage). Energy resistance (and resistance to all damage of a weapon type, both magic and otherwise) is priced as that of a "rare" item in the Dungeon Master's Guide—the type of gear you start getting at level 5—which means this is a de facto addition of a "Rare" quality magic property to an existing item, as a class feature. And this is one of the ones I asked about down-scaling on. So, do you have suggestions for alternatives?


AND there's seemingly no method of the armor being damaged except by the wearer at very high levels.

Damage it like you damage things.


Oh and not to mention flight.

...Yes, flight... On a class that can cast Fly, and can gain Wings of Flying as a class feature.

[Matticusrex]

*blinks*

*reads it again*

Ok... is it just me or is this class ridiculously OP compared to the classes in the PHB?

First, the biggest offense: infuse magic. Doesn't this ability allow artificers to break the whole 1 concentration effect thing? Where are all the torches and pitchforks over the casual ability to bypass that sacred cow? Every time I've even hinted at an ability to concentrate on two things at once in my homebrew threads the number of complaints that get raised is incredible. This does it up to Int mod things at once. This also lets you take advantage of other people's concentration slot which is incredible.

Next the chassis: d8 hp, con(!) and int saves, three tools, three skills, automatic expertise in the tools(!), free magic items, bypassing the attunement limits of magic items(!), a free CR 2 large mechanical pet, 1/3 caster, and a capstone that is insanely good. So I guess this class is only for games with magic items included... oh well. But seriously this sounds like a sorcerer + rogue + ranger multiclass all rolled into one class so ASI delay and MAD requirements vanish.

Then the subclasses. Both of them get at-will abilities that do rogue sneak attack level damage, without needing to qualify for sneak attacks, at range. Alchemist gets a bunch of useful potions and bombs while gunsmith gets a very powerful ranged weapon. Both are given as practically at-will bonuses.

Even single classed, I see almost no reason why anyone would play: arcane trickster, eldritch knight, or ranger(any) if this class were available. And multiclassed this thing opens up a bunch of abuse:

chain warlock 3: 2x pact magic slots to infuse into items then short rest recover them + a familiar to use your infused items. This allows you to cast spells as a free(!) action, bypassing the restriction on only 1 spell per round that isn't a cantrip(!) and allowing your familiar to concentrate on it for you(!). Who needs quicken spell?
thief rogue 3: speaking of quicken spell, thieves can use an object as a bonus action. You make spells into objects. Free quicken spell all day long right here.
druid 2: wild shaping doesn't affect your int score, enjoy casting spells from your items while wild shaped.


Don't get me wrong, I LOVE this class and would be thrilled to play one. But I have a feeling that this will be banned from most tables. (just like the theurge tradition wizard, undying light warlock, and sharpshooter fighter)

Please tell me I'm wrong and am just misreading the class or something.

Their gun and potions are pretty sub-par when compared to other classes and how they can optimize. This class is very red mage in that it does a little of everything but excels at nothing. It has pretty bad scaling on a lot of it's abilities, it lacks synergies with it's pet and the magic items it can create are very middle of the road in terms of power and by the looks of this thread I dont think anyone else is seeing it as too powerful, if anything it could use a small boost.

[Grey Watcher]

The person you're quoting is responding to someone's homebrew, not part of the UA article.

Suddenly I feel like quoting that scene where Homer Simpson sings about how S-M-R-T he is. :smalltongue:

[Lonely Tylenol]

I'm a little foggy on my 5e crafting, but isn't the crafting system in 5e more or less assumed as an off-screen thing? Like, if a person says "I'd like my warlock to craft a a dagger that returns to my hand when I throw it if I reveal a personal secret about myself on each use", isn't it just a question of the DM checking to see if they've got enough free time and resources to pull it off without breaking the world's verisimilitude?

The artificer feels like it could build off of that. In addition to the regular crafting that any class gets, the artificer also has some guaranteed inventions that they can pull into play even if they've not reasonably had much down time in the story.

Honestly... The actual item creation component of the Artificer felt like that in 3.5E. It was Accountant: the Mathening, where you basically just did a *lot* more in your downtime, and managed extra resource points that allowed you to do so. The 3.5E crafting system was a *lot* more involved (in that it required X days, Y gold, and Z experience to make an item, and tables and charts &c &c &c), but you, the player, did basically all of this during downtime using spreadsheets. There was very little active "item crafting" at the table, and what little "active crafting" feel there was typically came from infusions, which the 5E artificer can do more or less unchanged from old editions.


Suddenly I feel like quoting that scene where Homer Simpson sings about how S-M-R-T he is. :smalltongue:

Yeah, day 1 response to UA "concept riffing" homebrew at that... Which is like fanfic of fanfic. Sorry to disappoint. :smalltongue:

I can take the discussion elsewhere or something, but I literally just threw things together with the idea of presenting the concept of a defense-oriented artificer to the existing artificer discussion, so I'm not really motivated to continue it elsewhere.

[Sception]

I like it. Looks fun. I especially love that it's an actual class, and not just another somewhat redundant subclass. Almost enough to renew my hope in an edition that started out of the gate looking so strong and then immediately wandered into a corner and fell asleep.

More content like this would make me a happy player. Maybe even a dedicated pet class? (not a subclass NOT A SUBCLASS, the concept is too intrusive on the game to work as a *secondary* gimmick).

Anyway, yeah. I like it a lot

[Mjolnirbear]

I, too, see the potential for a homunculi subclass. I'd almost rather give the base class "Find Familiar" except mechanical, and then have the subclass buff it to varying degrees.

I ... kinda? ...like the idea of the mech suit. The gun strikes me as more like a blunderbuss, no worse than WoW's iconic Dwarf Hunter with the Bear. (I admit I've recently come to be more accepting of possible firearms). A mech suit--well, the idea seems cool by itself, but it's very japanime to me, definitely breaking the immersion for me.


Ideally, the Artificer should be a tinkerer; the subclasses should be what you tinker *with*. Alchemist = potions. Gunsmith = firearms. Homunculi = mechanical creations (and probably the kind of artificers Cannith used to create the Warforged). So if we're gonna propose subclasses, they should be a tinker's specialty.

******

When I first read the class, I found it lacking. To me, a 1/3 caster might as well not be a caster at all, because by the time you get spells the campaign is half over (an exaggeration, but you get the picture). The infusions could have more variation. The homunculi/golem subclass was a glaring omission. I'll admit, I was comparing it to the Artificer of Alancia, and seeing only the stuff thta was missing.

The more I read, the more interested I become. I'd be interested to see what other subclasses get proposed. Given its current reception and its semi-official WTC status, I might adopt it for my Eberron campaign.

[Afgncaap5]

Honestly... The actual item creation component of the Artificer felt like that in 3.5E. It was Accountant: the Mathening, where you basically just did a *lot* more in your downtime, and managed extra resource points that allowed you to do so. The 3.5E crafting system was a *lot* more involved (in that it required X days, Y gold, and Z experience to make an item, and tables and charts &c &c &c), but you, the player, did basically all of this during downtime using spreadsheets. There was very little active "item crafting" at the table, and what little "active crafting" feel there was typically came from infusions, which the 5E artificer can do more or less unchanged from old editions.

Oh, I know. One of my most successful characters was also the one that required, by far, the most paperwork.

The difference, though, is that in 3.5 my artificer had questions of caster level, gp limits, xp expenditures, UMD checks, and time spent to consider. In 5e, though, I think I could do the same basic thing by saying "Say, in the week that we've got before the army arrives, can I finish making that magical tree I want to make that grows potion-fruit every day?" And now the GM can just say "Yes", "No", or "I dunno, roll something and we'll see." Much less of a headache for me now. While I'll always fondly remember my 3.5 artificer, there was a *lot* of time spent working.

(Incidentally, my GM told me I had two weeks for the army to arrive, and I figured out, to the day, *exactly* how much could get crafted between myself, my dedicated wright (doing the alchemy for me), and my quill of scribing. Unfortunately, the GM didn't let me know that the army's advance force of shock troopers would interrupt me eight days into the process with less than half of my work finished. Made for an exciting end to the campaign!)

[Lonely Tylenol]

The difference, though, is that in 3.5 my artificer had questions of caster level, gp limits, xp expenditures, UMD checks, and time spent to consider. In 5e, though, I think I could do the same basic thing by saying "Say, in the week that we've got before the army arrives, can I finish making that magical tree I want to make that grows potion-fruit every day?" And now the GM can just say "Yes", "No", or "I dunno, roll something and we'll see." Much less of a headache for me now.

Whereas in 3.5E, you say "in the week that we've got before the army arrives, I can finish making that magical tree I want to make that grows potion-fruit every day. Here's my Master's thesis on how." :smallamused:

[jas61292]

First, the biggest offense: infuse magic. Doesn't this ability allow artificers to break the whole 1 concentration effect thing? Where are all the torches and pitchforks over the casual ability to bypass that sacred cow? Every time I've even hinted at an ability to concentrate on two things at once in my homebrew threads the number of complaints that get raised is incredible. This does it up to Int mod things at once. This also lets you take advantage of other people's concentration slot which is incredible.

There are no torches and pitchforks because nothing here actually effects concentration. Anyone who thinks it does, frankly, is wrong. I know it most certainly has been clarified by the developers at some point that, unless a magic item specifically says otherwise, a spell it casts that has a concentration component still requires the user to concentrate on it. And while I do not know if the rules explicitly state that, unless they explicitly state to the contrary, then of course a concentration spell requires you to concentrate on it. Believing otherwise is just wishful thinking.

Now, the fact is that for the artificer, it does not specify if these infusions work like normal magic items or not, so we do not know for sure exactly how they work. But at best, the person who activates it is the one who is forced to concentrate on it, allowing others in your party to concentrate on your spells for you. At worst, all of them are still concentrated on by you, and giving one to someone else could end up causing them to (un)intentionally interrupt your concentration on another spell.

The former case is what seems most believable to me, and that is really nice, but its honestly not that amazing, because it explicitly says it only works with your artificer spells (no multiclass shinanigans) and the artificer is a 1/3 caster. Yeah, having the archer concentrate on his own Fly spell is really nice. But its hardly gamebreaking by the time it comes online at level 13. And its still costing you one of your very limited spell slots to cast, as the infused items will all lose power by the end of a long rest.

If there is any major mechanical issue with the class its the free magic items, as that takes a theoretically optional part of the game that is supposed to be completely in the hands of the DM, and lets the player do whatever they want with it.

[Grey Watcher]

*blinks*

*reads it again*

Ok... is it just me or is this class ridiculously OP compared to the classes in the PHB?

First, the biggest offense: infuse magic. Doesn't this ability allow artificers to break the whole 1 concentration effect thing? Where are all the torches and pitchforks over the casual ability to bypass that sacred cow? Every time I've even hinted at an ability to concentrate on two things at once in my homebrew threads the number of complaints that get raised is incredible. This does it up to Int mod things at once. This also lets you take advantage of other people's concentration slot which is incredible.

I think that the idea of being Q to the other PC's James Bond is kinda the point of the class. Here's what I'd do to reign that in: if it's an effect that requires concentration, whoever activates it has to maintain concentration. If the effect has a duration of longer than 1 minute (regardless of whether it requires concentration), its duration is reduced to one minute: enough that it'll last through an entire fight (barring certain major boss fights), but won't be a substitute for having the caster on hand.

There is still the problem of multiplying your concentration, but it means that casters will have to choose between conentrating on your toy or on their own spell and tanks will be making concentration checks a lot (and Barbarians won't be able to use concentration effects while raging). Still potentially problematic for hide-stab-hide Rogues, archers, and other non-casters who are good at not getting hit in the first place.


Next the chassis: d8 hp,

That jumped out at me, too, but since there are no more d4 hit die Wizards, d8 is sort of the default for anyone who isn't meant to be especially frail (d6) or especially hearty (d10). (Barbarians are outliers, but being extra-super-beefy is supposed to be their thing.


three tools, three skills, automatic expertise in the tools(!)

I like the Expertise on Tools part, but maybe tone it down to be more in line with the Rogue: two at first, two later in your career. And, unlike the Rogue, you may only choose a tool to benefit from this feature.


free magic items

This, I will agree, is just silly. I'd straight up replace it with Use Magic Device or similar shenanigans. ("Listen you stupid staff, I don't care if you're bound only to serve the High Priest of the Wicked Deceiver, you're going to work for me and you're going to like it!")

Plus it's weird that you could sell an entire class feature for cash.


bypassing the attunement limits of magic items(!)

This was what really leapt out at me. I get the design intent, but there should be some risk or limitation: like you only stay attuned for some number of hours and then you have to un-attune back down to three or you have to spend hit dice or it incurs exhaustion or something. Plus, as I said in a earlier post, I'd almost certainly make "ATTUNE TO ALL THE ITEMS!" a specific subclass.


a free CR 2 large mechanical pet

Much like the Beastmaster, having a Robo Puppy should be its own subclass.


a capstone that is insanely good.

I'd swap this out for some Ultimate Infuse Item. Not sure exactly what, but a number of class capstones are "You know that thing you've been doing your whole career? It's super-extra-awesome now."


Then the subclasses.

I will admit, my eyes glazed over for this part of the article :smallredface: ; I just think Gun Nut and Alchemist have been done better and more elegantly on DM's Guild.

[Milo v3]

I'm a little foggy on my 5e crafting, but isn't the crafting system in 5e more or less assumed as an off-screen thing? Like, if a person says "I'd like my warlock to craft a a dagger that returns to my hand when I throw it if I reveal a personal secret about myself on each use", isn't it just a question of the DM checking to see if they've got enough free time and resources to pull it off without breaking the world's verisimilitude?
No. It is much simpler than 3.5e's system (nothing wrong with streamlining, even Pathfinder steamlined it because of it being abit of a mess), but 5e still has rules for how long it takes, how much it costs, what caster level you need to be, there are guidelines on making custom items, etc.

One big issue with it is that it ends up being that 25 gp a day takes a hell of a long time to craft anything but the weakest items (which only take 4 days, which is pretty decently fast). Which is fine at low levels.... but it soon becomes ridiculous as you increase in level.


what little "active crafting" feel there was typically came from infusions, which the 5E artificer can do more or less unchanged from old editions.
*looks again at the article*
Uh.... where are you seeing anything like infusions in the 5e artificer?

[Potato_Priest]

I must say, I'm dissapointed.

I like some of the base mechanics, but the Mechanical Assistant should've been in a subclass, not the Class' Main combat power source. It seems like the Mechanical assistant made them shy away from more interesting and powerful combat possibilities that the subclasses and/or main class could have had, because it was so good.

If anyone is interested, I think a good and creative take on companion creatures can be found here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?508502-The-Beastkeeper-Companion-creature-based-matrial-social-class-(PEACH)&highlight=beastkeeper). The class in the forum I linked has a few problems, but the companion is well-designed, in my opinion. Something similar, but toned down would've worked fairly well for an artificier construct builder subclass.

[Foxhound438]

Just a helpful little reminder for the people who resent the tech level dissonance with the gunsmith: it mentions that the Thunder Cannon is a mix of magic and tech. The exact ratio is left up to the player and/or the DM. If you want to say the only tech is making the thing survive the explosions, that's fine. If you want to say the only magic is keeping the gunpowder stable, that's also fine.

>agree to nature party
>make a gunslinger
>other party members throw a fit, but DM doesn't really care and just starts session
>bust out that half of a rotted out log with a branch sticking off like a pistol grip and pack rocks off the ground into the end of it, blast something's face off
>other party members suddenly ok with it

[Malifice]

I so desperately want a 'bladebound' Mage-smith Artificer subclass.

At 1st level it gets a magic black bladed longsword (and martial weapon proficiency). At 3rd level it gets a boost to damage with it (scaling up). At higher levels the weapon does nifty things.

Not sure where to slot in extra attack.

[Joe the Rat]

The "infusions" are the "cast your spell on a sock and let the other guy use it later" power at 4th level.


More shot/bomb options would be nice. Tiered options would open design space.


What is really missing is making the artificer better at magic item creation (besides making one for free every 5 levels. Halving time and/or cost for production would be a start. If universal boost is too much, key it to the relevant tool expertise. Tool expertise, other than thieves tools, is verging on ribbon.

[Potato_Priest]

I so desperately want a 'bladebound' Mage-smith Artificer subclass.

I encourage you to make one then. Unless your Dm is a "published material only" stick in the mud, if you make it well, they will probably let you use it. People on the forums will also have lots of advice for you on making the class (or sublass) that you desire.

[Lonely Tylenol]

The "infusions" are the "cast your spell on a sock and let the other guy use it later" power at 4th level.

This is the weirdest game of Strip D&D I have ever seen... :smalleek:

[Finback]

I'm torn between a dwarf artificier based on Jamie Hyneman, or a kobold artificier based on Adam Savage.

[Grey Watcher]

I'm torn between a dwarf artificier based on Jamie Hyneman, or a kobold artificier based on Adam Savage.

I need to write that down to put in my back pocket for NPCs next time I DM.

Actually, may a sig that?

[Lonely Tylenol]

I'm torn between a dwarf artificier based on Jamie Hyneman, or a kobold artificier based on Adam Savage.

Is the allosaurus servant Tory Belleci?

[Grey Watcher]

Is the allosaurus servant Tory Belleci?

Disadvantage on any ability check involving a bicycle.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Disadvantage on any ability check involving a bicycle.

It's the arms.

[Finback]

I need to write that down to put in my back pocket for NPCs next time I DM.

Actually, may a sig that?

By all means!

[Foxhound438]

*blinks*

*reads it again*

Ok... is it just me or is this class ridiculously OP compared to the classes in the PHB?

First, the biggest offense: infuse magic. Doesn't this ability allow artificers to break the whole 1 concentration effect thing? Where are all the torches and pitchforks over the casual ability to bypass that sacred cow? Every time I've even hinted at an ability to concentrate on two things at once in my homebrew threads the number of complaints that get raised is incredible. This does it up to Int mod things at once. This also lets you take advantage of other people's concentration slot which is incredible.

Next the chassis: d8 hp, con(!) and int saves, three tools, three skills, automatic expertise in the tools(!), free magic items, bypassing the attunement limits of magic items(!), a free CR 2 large mechanical pet, 1/3 caster, and a capstone that is insanely good. So I guess this class is only for games with magic items included... oh well. But seriously this sounds like a sorcerer + rogue + ranger multiclass all rolled into one class so ASI delay and MAD requirements vanish.

Then the subclasses. Both of them get at-will abilities that do rogue sneak attack level damage, without needing to qualify for sneak attacks, at range. Alchemist gets a bunch of useful potions and bombs while gunsmith gets a very powerful ranged weapon. Both are given as practically at-will bonuses.

Even single classed, I see almost no reason why anyone would play: arcane trickster, eldritch knight, or ranger(any) if this class were available. And multiclassed this thing opens up a bunch of abuse:

chain warlock 3: 2x pact magic slots to infuse into items then short rest recover them + a familiar to use your infused items. This allows you to cast spells as a free(!) action, bypassing the restriction on only 1 spell per round that isn't a cantrip(!) and allowing your familiar to concentrate on it for you(!). Who needs quicken spell?
thief rogue 3: speaking of quicken spell, thieves can use an object as a bonus action. You make spells into objects. Free quicken spell all day long right here.
druid 2: wild shaping doesn't affect your int score, enjoy casting spells from your items while wild shaped.


Don't get me wrong, I LOVE this class and would be thrilled to play one. But I have a feeling that this will be banned from most tables. (just like the theurge tradition wizard, undying light warlock, and sharpshooter fighter)

Please tell me I'm wrong and am just misreading the class or something.

1) it does break that old sacred cow, but it's on a 1/3 caster with very little in the way of impressive combat spells. Maybe stipulate that you can't put haste in something, but nothing else on the class's spell list (which is all the feature can infuse, mind you) is really all that powerful.

2) free magic items, yes, but it's in place of class features. Note that if you lose, break, or just use in some cases, the item you get, you have a permanently dead feature. Also, none of the items are hugely impactful combat wise- no +x weapons, no wand of magic missile, etc.

3) yes, no sneak attack requirement, but if I had a thousand dollars for every time a rogue couldn't get sneak attack if they actually tried I'd still be dirt poor. Not to mention, sneak attack can be attempted twice by using twf, while these can't. As for the at will utility options, they really do pale in comparison to a wizard's spells.

4) reason for arcane trickster: more useful spell list; reason for eldritch knight: actually good dpr with GWM/SS; reason for ranger: combat useful spells, good dpr with CBM+hunter's mark+colossus slayer

5) yes, that chain warlock with a 4hp familiar concentrating on a self-targeted spell is so terrifying that it hurts.

6) use object =/= "as an action a creature can cast the spell".

7) wild shape druid not exactly impressive either, considering the options for the spell infusions.



Yes this class breaks some of the rules, but so does sorcerer- no one else can cast fireball as a bonus action... fighter also breaks the rules, by taking 2 actions in one turn... and the rogue, which gets +17 to checks in the system where bonuses aren't supposed to get very big... and the bard, who can have spells outside of their class list... and so on. the point is that the "broken rules" are broken in a way that doesn't send the whole jenga tower crashing down, just like all the existing ones. The only possible exception is the CR2 pet at level 6, but even then a full caster can conjure one of those up at level 5 if they don't care to do anything else with that L3 slot.


Not to say that the class is purely fine, but that's my views on your issues. The survey for this will be out in a week, we all have our vote in whether or not something's broken.

[T.G. Oskar]

Didn't really expect this. Well...I was looking for it, but wasn't expecting they'd go for it. Then again, I think they received the memo that people just didn't like the Artificer as a Wizard subclass, and they decided to go for it. As things go, it's pretty obvious this is a rough draft, but it has some pretty nice stuff.

First, what I think doesn't really work, or could be improved:

Casting. Don't take me wrong - I don't really expect them to have full casting, but Paladin/Ranger casting was reasonable. They already lack cantrips, in any case. I would have done it somewhat like Warlock, in terms of keeping Paladin/Ranger style casting (up to 5th level spells), but then get an equivalent of Mystic Arcana - considering how Infuse Magic works, they could make it so that it only works if infused on an item. That gives it a nice touch. Also, I'd do it more as a Wizard, except you learn "formulas", and I'd expand the spell list a wee bit more, though I'd definitely keep it as a buffer class - the spell list really brings up what the Artificer should do.
Mechanical Servant as a class feature. Mostly, because it diminishes the worth of the Ranger's animal companion as a subclass - a Ranger must sacrifice some traits to get an animal companion, the Artificer gets a pet for nothing. I agree that the Mechanical Servant should be part of its own subclass, and then make it a horizontal improvement, where it sacrifices some of the stuff a Beastmaster/Beast Conclave Ranger can do in exchange for being a construct. Also - Large!? Sure, it doesn't scale, but it opens a whole lot more options than the Ranger gets...

Notice it's pretty short, but it deals with some of the biggest draws of the Artificer? In comparison, this is what I really believe it's a hit:

Infuse Magic. Even if it's limited to the Artificer spell list, which is pretty small, it's a hit. The part about outsourcing the Concentration mechanic of your few spells to others is a pretty interesting idea that makes the Artificer a pretty solid buffer, while allowing other casters to spread buffs. I'm not entirely sure about how the class feature "breaks" the Concentration mechanic (IIRC, the magic item rules specifically indicate when a spell effect doesn't require concentration; otherwise, it acts like the spell and it thus ends another ongoing concentration effect). For the most part, though, it feels like a clever way to make the class unique - improvised wands and outfitting everybody with "Boots" of Flying kinda feels like the thing a gadgeteer would do, and the Artificer always brings up that feel.
The Alchemist specialization. I always said that, if the Artificer was to have a set of subclasses, it should have the Alchemist, and....lo and behold, it has! The subclass features aren't as bad as others would claim - they're moderately better than the Battlemaster's maneuvers (pretty much at-will, scale relatively decently), they seem to suffer the problem of Four Elements Monk - the few options and how they scale seem underwhelming compared to how they execute. A 10d6 acid flask every turn is, IMO, no joke - a Rogue could do a lot more, but with more hurdles (requiring a specific set-up), and it gets resisted differently (acid resistance vs. physical resistance, which is more common). Healing Draught feels like it overpowers Lay on Hands, but since it's burst healing 1/long rest, it also feels underwhelming (IMO, it's almost at the middle, but leaning on overpowered by higher levels - that's roughly 45 HP healed to someone as an action, with virtually no other resources spent). Alchemist Fire is a cool mini-AoE effect, though fire is resisted a lot. The draughts and reagents feel they blur the lines between cantrip and spell sometimes, but never truly overwhelming other options.
The Gunsmith specialization. This is more because of Rule of Cool than anything else. Sure, the idea of having a "gun" may seem off to many, but I like it - and as others have said, it evokes the idea of early cannons that require specialized training to use, and the Artificer not only gets that, but unique uses for it. I'd like the ammunition to be a bit more spread out, maybe having something like Dragon's Fire as well, rather than a specific set of ammunition. It doesn't have to be a "gun" - as it stands, it feels more like a Magitek fire lance than anything else, and that I definitely dig.

I'd say that, for a rough draft, it's pretty solid. It's a very good start, which could use a whole lot more flavor, but overall, I definitely want WotC to focus on this and make it official. It needs some polishing (the degree of seriousness in polishing is debatable), but this is a very nice gift. I said that the Artificer NEEDED to be a class, and this is a great way not just to add more classes and bring justice to this archetype, but also delivers great insight at how to create new classes.

[Malifice]

Mechanical Servant as a class feature. Mostly, because it diminishes the worth of the Ranger's animal companion as a subclass - a Ranger must sacrifice some traits to get an animal companion, the Artificer gets a pet for nothing. I agree that the Mechanical Servant should be part of its own subclass, and then make it a horizontal improvement, where it sacrifices some of the stuff a Beastmaster/Beast Conclave Ranger can do in exchange for being a construct. Also - Large!? Sure, it doesn't scale, but it opens a whole lot more options than the Ranger gets...

Agree. 6th is such a nice place to plonk extra attack for a 'martial' bent Artificer archetype also.

Id prefer to make the Golem an arcehtype feature for a specific archetype rather than a class feature for all artificers.


The Gunsmith specialization. This is more because of Rule of Cool than anything else. Sure, the idea of having a "gun" may seem off to many, but I like it - and as others have said, it evokes the idea of early cannons that require specialized training to use, and the Artificer not only gets that, but unique uses for it. I'd like the ammunition to be a bit more spread out, maybe having something like Dragon's Fire as well, rather than a specific set of ammunition. It doesn't have to be a "gun" - as it stands, it feels more like a Magitek fire lance than anything else, and that I definitely dig.

Easily re-fluffed as a wand and not a gun though (for a more traditional Eberron feel).

[Mjolnirbear]

How about taking out the servant from base class and making them half casters? If that's balanced, then the servant could become the third subclass.

The spell slots balance issue also matters for infusions. Are infusions sufficiently limited that more spells per day won't make them OP?

[mephnick]

I'm glad it's not totally crafting centric. Crafting is something NPCs do, not heroes.

[Milo v3]

I'm glad it's not totally crafting centric. Crafting is something NPCs do, not heroes.
To me, people saying that means the class is an automatic failure. It's called Artificer. The whole point is to make Crafting heroic in scale and power. Saying you want it to not be totally crafting centric is like asking for a Fighter who isn't combat centric.

[Sigreid]

...

Actually, scratch that: giving your friend a Sword of Sleep sounds like the most hilariously cruel and ill-timed prank ever.



For another system there was a sword Deathkiss that incapacitated the victim as it's cuts caused orgasmic pleasure.

[Foxhound438]

How about taking out the servant from base class and making them half casters? If that's balanced, then the servant could become the third subclass.

The spell slots balance issue also matters for infusions. Are infusions sufficiently limited that more spells per day won't make them OP?

a) seems fine to me, but remember that the damage scaling for these guys is in the sneak attack form, so putting that on a 1/2 caster rather than a 1/3 caster as the arcane trickster has to could be problematic, or at the very least something to tip toe around when re-balancing for the higher casting power

b) a better fix I think (and one that settles a lot of people's problems) would be to make the infuse item ability only work for non-concentration spells, but of course you would want to adjust the spell list in that case to include more non-concentration things that infuse could then work on.

[Sigreid]

If there is any major mechanical issue with the class its the free magic items, as that takes a theoretically optional part of the game that is supposed to be completely in the hands of the DM, and lets the player do whatever they want with it.

I would assume that any campaign that doesn't have magic items fairly readily available (even if it's not magic mart) would also not have a magic item crafting specialization class in it.

[Ilorin Lorati]

It's also not like it's an unlimited list, it's a very limited set of options out of a published book (the DMG), and isn't the end of the world in any case.

[jas61292]

I would assume that any campaign that doesn't have magic items fairly readily available (even if it's not magic mart) would also not have a magic item crafting specialization class in it.

I don't know all the history of the artificer class, but to me there is a very big difference between someone who can infuse magic into items for some cool effects, and maybe has a few class specific items they make as part of progressions, and a class that literally makes a variety of magic items straight out of the Dungeon Master's guide. I actually think the infusion stuff is really cool, and things like the thunder cannon are not really any different than a warlock pack weapon or something.

But one of the things I love about 5e is that normal magic items are not part of normal progression. They are bonuses the DM can (and in many campaigns, should) award. But without the assumed magic mart economy, it allows the DM to decide what kind of items they want to give out as cool rewards. A class that just gets to pick and choose from items as a class feature breaks this. And to be honest, I think it is really bad design, as for all intents and purposes, they are an optional part of the game. Even if they are clearly going to be more common for games with a more open magic item economy, from a game design perspective, it would be like making a class that gives feats as class features, despite them being optional. A class that simply cannot function in certain games is poorly made. And I think that's a shame, cause I love everything else about it.

[Regitnui]

.That all said, I'm fine with the artificer class getting gunpowder-equivalent substances that work along the same lines as the alchemists' formulae. The artificer can make it and use it, but the stuff is inherently unstable and isn't easily used by others, so they can't mass produce it or sell it on the open market.

This is more along the lines of what I meant. Of all the other factions Cannith could sell this too, only Kundarak is willing to undergo the weeks (months?) of training to learn how to use the fire lance properly (including reloading it at speed) instead of just equipping their ranged units with staves or wands.


Eberron Hobgoblin Artificers.

For the Dirge Singer!

Yep. Byeshk-bullets, all you need for those pesky aberrations.


I am seconding the skepticism on "superior gunpowder-analogue that doesn't see field use." In any case, it wasn't the propellant that I was concerning myself with. It was more the reload time. Chinese fire lances don't reload quickly. I'm not even sure if they were supposed to be reloaded at all in the field. Being able to load another shot in the firearm in less time than it takes to snap off an aimed shot is not a characteristic of early firearm prototypes. Clearly the weapon is something more akin to a breech-loading rifle or perhaps a Minie ball-firing musket with some sort of self-cleaning powder than it is to a fire lance.

A round is six seconds long. Assuming that you're aiming and firing with your action, your bonus action is spent dropping another load of ball bearings and exploding powder into the firing chamber. Cleaning is what you do after the troll screaming at you has stopped trying to rip your face off.


For those saying guns aren't part of Eberron, they might become a part of Eberron if 5e Eberron is set further in the timeline.

You're funny. Part of the charm of Eberron is that it doesn't have the 'canon history' that forces Forgotten Realms to keep up with the editions. It's always 998YK when you start, barring an enterprising DM. It's always postwar tensions bubbling, it's always Aurala, Boranel, Jaela, and Kaius staring at each other over the grey waste of the Mournland. Droaam is still jockeying to be taken seriously. The Lhazaar Princes are always a piratical threat on the horizon. The quori are always trying to control the dreams of mortals, the Lords of Dust are always trying to control the world, etc.

Moving the setting forward would require cutting off branches, and clearly set up one or more of the many evils ahead of their competitors. I say no. The gunsmith can fit into Eberron as is. Just with a little flavour to cover why 3.5 and 4e didn't have it. But then again, 3.5 didn't have eladrin, dragon born or tieflings in the world, so 4e actually made more dramatic changes to the setting than "Exploding alchemy powder".


I kind of want to create subclasses for the Artificer revolving around being a mecha-tank (heavy armor user with limited offensive capabilities, perhaps built into the armor) as well as niche, possibly NPC, subclasses relating to siege engineering (perhaps revolving around the existing catapult, trebuchet, ballista, and battering ram) and vehicles (conferring special bonuses and abilities related to maneuvering and operating vehicles, which could include ships, land vehicles, airships, and their weaponry). Who's with me?

I had a DMsG artificer that had a Rune Armour subclass, a Homunculus subclass, an Alchemist and a Gunslinger. Vehicles are a big part of Eberron, but the sort of thing best left offscreen and used as set dressing. You can't guarantee always having an airship, elemental galleon or other vehicle around, after all.

[Dman]

I don't know all the history of the artificer class, but to me there is a very big difference between someone who can infuse magic into items for some cool effects, and maybe has a few class specific items they make as part of progressions, and a class that literally makes a variety of magic items straight out of the Dungeon Master's guide. I actually think the infusion stuff is really cool, and things like the thunder cannon are not really any different than a warlock pack weapon or something.

But one of the things I love about 5e is that normal magic items are not part of normal progression. They are bonuses the DM can (and in many campaigns, should) award. But without the assumed magic mart economy, it allows the DM to decide what kind of items they want to give out as cool rewards. A class that just gets to pick and choose from items as a class feature breaks this. And to be honest, I think it is really bad design, as for all intents and purposes, they are an optional part of the game. Even if they are clearly going to be more common for games with a more open magic item economy, from a game design perspective, it would be like making a class that gives feats as class features, despite them being optional. A class that simply cannot function in certain games is poorly made. And I think that's a shame, cause I love everything else about it.

its hardly like theyre game breaking items I mean at most at level 15 you help out a ranger whose rolled terribly get alittle better at shooting. Bag of beans could backfire horribly dont get me started on the 20th level stuff

[Ilorin Lorati]

I don't know all the history of the artificer class, but to me there is a very big difference between someone who can infuse magic into items for some cool effects, and maybe has a few class specific items they make as part of progressions, and a class that literally makes a variety of magic items straight out of the Dungeon Master's guide..

The original Artificer, in the 3.5 ECS, was a magic item creation specialist, and got most of the magic item creation feats - not to mention there was an extra magic item creation feat (Etch Schema) that was created for Eberron to help explain the state of magic.

[Malifice]

I'm glad it's not totally crafting centric. Crafting is something NPCs do, not heroes.

There are plenty of crafting centric heroes in fiction and legend.

Elof in the Anvil of the Ice comes to mind.

He was based off the famous hero Wayland the Smith (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayland_the_Smith).

[8wGremlin]

Crag Cat from Stormkings Thunder has Nondetection, Pounce, Spell Turning (has advantage, if spell targeted at cat, and cat saves, and if the spell is 7th level or lower, spell is reflected back to caster!)

[Anderlith]

Im thinking give the construct to Alchemists as a subclass ability, & extra attack to Gunsmiths.

Expand the spell list a touch, maybe let the artificer borrow a spell like a bard every so often.

As for the list of magic items...
I dont know whether it needs expanding or just retooled altogether. It offers an odd assortment of varying power.

Perhaps your choice of a common, uncommon, rare, very rare, etc at each tier instead, & the DM has to approve.

[Vogonjeltz]

Constructive.

In fairness that was after the details about how it cherry picked some of the best features of several other classes and put them into subclass features (which ones did you consider the ribbon abilities?)


Gunslinger starts with a free ranged Greatsword with level scaling. Alchemist starts with a pouch of (alchemical attack and healing options), also with phenomenal level scaling. The class is literally gifted five magical items as a class feature, starting at level two. It's... Kind of this class's thing, in all incarnations.

First off, the Gunsmith can never multi attack with that ranged greatsword, making it little more than a glorified crossbow that costs class features to even use!

Second, the alchemist fire/acid cantrips are basically that. Cantrips. The healing is time limited and might as well be a healers kit.

And third, a few measily Magic items on leveling that probable already happened in treasure hordes is totally unimpressive.

none of which should imply that the class isn't interesting, only to say that, by way of comparison the power mech subclass you came up with is off the rails overpowered.


For all intents and purposes, half plate is worse to start with than chain mail for a DEX-dumping character (its attack options are Strength-based and its spell options are Intelligence-based, and then there's Constitution). If I wanted to make it explicitly a power option, I'd have made it chain mail; it is half plate purely for the sake of cost.

And yet it still grants better starting AC than the non heavy armor classes, and that's before taking into account that basic starting stats are certain to provide +2 to at least 3 stats, if not more. It's imbalanced to give a class a 750gp item at that level.


...With neither the scaling options or quality utility of a monk's Flurry of Blows...

A difference the monk won't match until after 5th level. That alone would be a disqualifying metric, that it is certainly better than using a regular weapon since it can't be disarmed is merely a cherry on top.


You are also calling overpowered a primary attack form, which gets 1d8+Strength at melee range a maximum of twice with level scaling, plus rider damage at level 11 (essentially the barest minimum a melee can have to be considered melee), when the first level feature of the Alchemist and Gunslinger literally give ranged sneak attack-scaling damage with energy types at 1st-level, with no justification thereof, so... I'm honestly looking for constructive criticism here, so can you explain your reasoning?

It's too good for the level that it is acquired at when compared to the rest of the game. Artificers don't get sneak attack, so I don't particularly care if multiclassing might be imbalanced at this time, UA isn't created with that rule in mind anyway.

I didn't go into this overly, but Extra Attack is extremely powerful and should not be tacked onto a partial casting class lightly, it is usually the centerpiece of those classes that have a subclass which grants it, and taking those subclasses always carries large opportunity costs in return. See: Bladesinger, Valor Bard.

If you want the subclass to be a vehicle construct creator, have it supplant the minion and be destructible, but cheaper to replace (it should be expected that the Artificer will lose it on occasion) and provide toned down benefits. (Better AC, DR, and improved attacks over alternative classes from the get go is why it's problematic)


Equivalent to a cantrip with slightly different scaling in exchange for being class-dependent, also as a primary damage option for a class with no other damage options (aside from Power Fist). Compare and contrast with Warlock's cantrip options (Eldritch Blast, with better dice and gaining CHA to damage on each blast 9 levels earlier without a level cost) and Wizard's spell options. Compare also, again, with the at-will damage options of Alchemist and Gunslinger. The only thing I am sketch on is force damage, and that's something I'm not sold on.

8 levels later than Barbarian rage, it gains an inferior form of resistance (Barbarian rage resists magical damage). Energy resistance (and resistance to all damage of a weapon type, both magic and otherwise) is priced as that of a "rare" item in the Dungeon Master's Guide—the type of gear you start getting at level 5—which means this is a de facto addition of a "Rare" quality magic property to an existing item, as a class feature. And this is one of the ones I asked about down-scaling on. So, do you have suggestions for alternatives?

Damage it like you damage things.

...Yes, flight... On a class that can cast Fly, and can gain Wings of Flying as a class feature.

Yes, neither of which is permanent flight. as comparison, the Dragon Sorcerer can have wings, but there are restrictions on usable armor as a result.

[jas61292]

The original Artificer, in the 3.5 ECS, was a magic item creation specialist, and got most of the magic item creation feats - not to mention there was an extra magic item creation feat (Etch Schema) that was created for Eberron to help explain the state of magic.

Well, I may not have been familiar with the artificer (or anything Eberron intended), but I am well versed in how crafting worked in 3.5. I've played crafting characters in 3.5, and I've played with crafting characters, and having experiences both sides, I can confidently say that I think it is one of the absolute worst parts of the system. It was annoying to deal with, ended up just amounting to a ton of out of session bookkeeping, and just made things really weird, what with the experience cost and all. I get it was intended as a balancing factor, but not only did it not work, but it makes absolutely no sense.

Now, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, I absolutely love that 5e completely changed the magic item paradigm. And I just feel that with this new paradigm, player item creation, whether through normal crafting or a specific class, really has no place in the game. But that does not mean we can't have something with similar flavor. And outside that one feature of this artificer, I think it does an excellent job. Frankly, I'd like to see them get rid of the magic item creation part altogether and just expand on infusion, as that is really what sets this class apart. Anyone with magic can, in theory, craft items. But infusion is what is cool and unique.

[SharkForce]

the concentration limit was put in place to keep spellcasters from taking over encounters. there's a world of difference between "here, have a short list of buff spells that someone can activate and concentrate on" and "here, have a free extra concentration ability that you can use for anything" (nothing indicates that there is no concentration requirement, and the person that makes the most sense to concentrate is the person activating the item).

the former leads to it *actually* being worth casting a haste spell on the party fighter. maybe. the latter leads to having two wall of force spells (or two webs, or web layered on top of stinking cloud, etc) in any remotely challenging fight. and, taken to an extreme, could eventually lead to a spellcaster being able to buff themselves to the point where they fight as well as or better than a fighter).

so no, i don't see a problem with this artificer getting the ability to hand off responsibility for concentrating on spells to other people. the way it's written, you can't even abuse it by multiclassing. and since it doesn't go against the whole point of the concentration rules in the first place, i'm totally ok with it.

(now, if you want to complain about WotC letting some abuse of concentration come into play, what you should really be looking at are those stones they introduced a couple modules back that can store spells and then explicitly cast the spell in one action. and, if it was an abjuration spell with expensive consumed material components, the cost is half... now, combine that with their ruling that a glyph of warding can store buffs and cast on allies. *that* i see as a problem. this? this is fine).

[RedMage125]

To me, people saying that means the class is an automatic failure. It's called Artificer. The whole point is to make Crafting heroic in scale and power. Saying you want it to not be totally crafting centric is like asking for a Fighter who isn't combat centric.

In a way, it does. It does some heroic crafting without the plebian "spend days in a lab making magic items for half the price, thus improving your WBL standing".

[Battlebooze]

I think I know what would fix the Capstone, not that Capstones are all that important.

Keep the six attuned items.

Get rid of the +1 to all saves per attuned item and give the Artificer advantage to all saves vs spells. This makes much more sense. Still a better capstone than most of the other classes...

[Lonely Tylenol]

In fairness that was after the details about how it cherry picked some of the best features of several other classes and put them into subclass features (which ones did you consider the ribbon abilities?)

Can you spot the ribbon in Gunslinger and Alchemist?

Much of the rest of this seems answerable through RTFM, so I will:


First off, the Gunsmith can never multi attack with that ranged greatsword, making it little more than a glorified crossbow that costs class features to even use!

RTFM:


Thunder Monger
At 3rd level, you learn to channel thunder energy into your Thunder Cannon. As an action, you can make a special attack with your Thunder Cannon that deals an extra 1d6 thunder damage on a hit.
This extra damage increases by 1d6 when you reach certain levels in this class: 5th level (2d6), 7th level (3d6), 9th level (4d6), 11th level (5d6), 13th level (6d6), 15th level (7d6), 17th level (8d6), and 19th level (9d6).

The standard Gunsmith attack option scales to 11d6 (2d6 piercing at level 1 + 1d6 Thunder every 2 levels after, up to 9d6 Thunder, equals 11d6).


Second, the alchemist fire/acid cantrips are basically that. Cantrips. The healing is time limited and might as well be a healers kit.

RTFM:


Alchemical Fire. . . . On impact, the vial detonates in a 5-foot radius. . . . Any creature in that area must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take 1d6 fire damage.
This formula’s damage increases by 1d6 when you reach certain levels in this class: 4th level (2d6), 7th level (3d6), 10th level (4d6), 13th


Alchemical Acid. . . . This formula’s damage increases by 1d6 when you reach certain levels in this class: 3rd level (2d6), 5th level (3d6), 7th level (4d6), 9th level (5d6), 11th level (6d6), 13th level (7d6), 15th level (8d6), 17th level (9d6), and 19th level (10d6).


Healing Draught. . . . This formula’s healing increases by 1d8 when you reach certain levels in this class: 3rd level (2d8), 5th level (3d8), 7th level (4d8), 9th level (5d8), 11th level (6d8), 13th level (7d8), 15th level (8d8), 17th level (9d8), and 19th level (10d8).

Point me to the cantrip that scales to 10d6, or the cantrip that scales to 7d6 which has an area of effect. Out of the box, this is considerably better than the best cantrip—Eldritch Blast—at dealing damage, in that the latter will only ever match either's damage with four successful hits in one round, class feature investment, and levels in an exclusive class—which uses it as its primary attack feature. And that's what these features are: primary attack features. Alchemist's Acid/Fire and Thunder Cannon/Monger are functionally equivalent to Sneak Attack in their damage range, and are considered side-grades in that they do slightly less damage (literally just base weapon damage+mod for the acid, and equivalent damage for Thunder Cannon/Monger) that proc unconditionally, but target different defenses and/or are resisted in different ways.

But yeah, 10d6 acid at 30 feet

And 2d6 piercing + 9d6 Thunder at 150 feet

Are totally inferior options to

2d8 + 2*STR + 2*INT bludgeoning which requires two successful attack rolls.

Silly me.

And a free Cure Wounds upscaled to the highest available spell slot at each level, for each party member for each long rest, totally might as well just be:


Healer's Kit. . . . As an action, you can expend one use of the kit to stabilize a creature that has 0 hit points, without needing to make a Wisdom (Medicine) check.

Silly me.


And yet it still grants better starting AC than the non heavy armor classes, and that's before taking into account that basic starting stats are certain to provide +2 to at least 3 stats, if not more. It's imbalanced to give a class a 750gp item at that level.

First, it's pretty explicitly a heavy armor class suggestion, so it should have better starting AC than the non heavy armor classes.

Second, standard array is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. Let's assume the 15 and 13/14 go to Strength and Intelligence, in an order that gets a 16 to Strength and hopefully 14 to Intelligence; these are your two attack stats and your primary casting stat, so you need to have a healthy investment in both. Either the 13 or the 14 goes into Constitution, depending on racial bonuses, because you are a d8 Hit Dice class that endeavors to melee without a shield. Your remaining stats are 12, 10, 8.

Which one do you put into Dexterity to take advantage of that Max 2 Dexterity mod of half plate?

Let's say you stick the 12 there and dumped Wisdom and Charisma. Fantastic; your AC is 16. Respectable for a 1st-level character. Better than the Rogue, who is pulling 14 (or 15 with studded leather), and the Wizard, who is pulling 15 with Mage Armor, at least until level 2 when the Wizard decided melee is in and goes Bladesinger. Over-under on the Barbarian, depending on if they went weapon+shield or weapon+weapon (or two-handed weapon), and narrowly edging out the Monk, the other unarmored class.

Meanwhile... The Paladin enters play with dumped DEX and 16 (with two-handed weapon) or 18 (with weapon+shield), as does the Fighter, as does the Cleric (when proficient in heavy armor). Literally all the heavy armor classes have an equal or better starting AC to a half plate Artificer. It's not a power option.

If I wanted a power option, the armored mech would start as chain mail that upgrades to plate, because then you could at least safely dump Dexterity to get to 16 AC. Literally the only reason half plate was chosen was to mitigate the cost of upgrading to plate, while incentivizing it (because the upgrade is actually worth it, armor-wise).

I'll hear an argument if you're willing to crunch the numbers and provide one, but you just keep insisting it's stupid overpowered without ever giving factual reasoning as to why.


A difference the monk won't match until after 5th level. That alone would be a disqualifying metric, that it is certainly better than using a regular weapon since it can't be disarmed is merely a cherry on top.

The Monk can match it at level 1: 1d8+STR is literally just longsword damage, and the monk edges out on that with the bonus action attack (without using Flurry of Blows, though flurry definitely seals the deal).

You wouldn't complain that a monk's unarmed strikes "won't match" literally any character with martial weapon proficiency using their choice of longsword (STR) or rapier (DEX). I doubt you would have these complaints if the Mechanist gained a single martial weapon proficiency to accompany its armor proficiency, and that would open up the greatsword (2d6+STR) as a damage option. Why is this the game-breaking option to you?

Like, please, explain your reasoning here. I am literally baffled. I can't think of a single melee archetype this supersedes. Extra Attack at level 5 and Intelligence mod as a rider at level 11 doesn't even compare to sword and board Barbarian at any break points, and Barbarian gets free advantage forever. It's a worse damage-dealing melee option than the freakin' Battlerager! I couldn't make this worse if I tried! What are you seeing here?!


It's too good for the level that it is acquired at when compared to the rest of the game. Artificers don't get sneak attack, so I don't particularly care if multiclassing might be imbalanced at this time, UA isn't created with that rule in mind anyway.

You misunderstand. Gunslinger and Alchemist's attack forms have sneak attack level scaling. As in, they are sneak attack. RTFM, above.

You are literally rebelling against, "this character gets a long sword and chain mail" as a level 1 class feature. Literally replace the level 1 feature in its entirety with "longsword and chain mail" and tell me which is more powerful at level 1.


I didn't go into this overly, but Extra Attack is extremely powerful and should not be tacked onto a partial casting class lightly, it is usually the centerpiece of those classes that have a subclass which grants it, and taking those subclasses always carries large opportunity costs in return. See: Bladesinger, Valor Bard.

RTFM the following:
• Valor Bard (Extra Attack at 6 as a full-caster)
• War Domain Cleric (bonus action attack at 1 as a full-caster, plus rider at 8 and 14)
• Moon Druid (multiattack on Wild Shape forms at 2 as a full-caster)
• Eldritch Knight (Extra Attack at 5, 11, and 20 as a 1/3-caster)
• Four Elements Monk (bonus action attack at 1, plural at 2, Extra Attack at 5 as a 1/3-"caster")
• Paladin (Extra Attack at 5 as a half-caster, plus rider at 11 that stacks with Divine Smite)
• Ranger (Extra Attack at 5 as a half-caster, plus spell rider)
• Blade Pact Warlock (Extra attack at 5 as a full-"caster", plus spell rider)
• Bladesinger Wizard (Extra Attack at 6 as a full-caster)

A complete list of the "partial casting" classes and subclasses (and melee-inclined full casters) which do not provide Extra Attack are as follows:
• Arcane Trickster (bonus action attack via two-weapon fighting, Sneak Attack as a rider)
• Artificer (Sneak Attack analogue as attack options on both Alchemist and Gunslinger)

Can you see what is unique about every single partial caster without Extra Attack? I'll tell you anyway: they all have Sneak Attack analogues. Mechanist does not have a Sneak Attack analogue, so it has Extra Attack, on a 1/3 caster chassis. This isn't complicated.


Yes, neither of which is permanent flight. as comparison, the Dragon Sorcerer can have wings, but there are restrictions on usable armor as a result.

There are... Restrictions on usable armor here, as well. You can literally only use the custom-fit armored mech. Am... Am I not communicating clearly here?

[Dman]

So ive been thinking about a character ill probobly use after my dino druid if not during that campaign if my dino druid dies but yeah.

Race: High Elf
Artificer Specialist: Gunsmith
probobly leave my stats to a roll.
Tools: the posioners kit and probobly a game set of some form
Skills: Investigation Nature Sleight of hand
starting weapons not sure dont think its really important since I have the gun altough ill probobly grab a bow from somewhere and build myself the bracers.
Background: Urban Bounty hunter.
Animal buddy: Rhino at this point
Feats depends on my rolls but probobly mounted combatant

[Anderlith]

Vuman Gunsmith, fashioned as a big game hunter. Contruct animal is just a taxidermied & mechanical animal, maybe rhino or bigcat, whatever makes the most sense for the enviornment.

[Malifice]

Im thinking give the construct to Alchemists as a subclass ability, & extra attack to Gunsmiths.

Extra attack is pointless on a Gunsmith. After 3rd level they are using thundrous shot every round (as an action).

[Anderlith]

Extra attack is pointless on a Gunsmith. After 3rd level they are using thundrous shot every round (as an action).

Yes, & the Thu der Cannon would be tooled to better fit that model

[Foxhound438]

Yes, & the Thu der Cannon would be tooled to better fit that model

why bother? the sneak attack equivalent is a lot cooler, an giving it extra attack as its damage scaling feature literally makes a worse eldritch knight.

[xyianth]

1) it does break that old sacred cow, but it's on a 1/3 caster with very little in the way of impressive combat spells. Maybe stipulate that you can't put haste in something, but nothing else on the class's spell list (which is all the feature can infuse, mind you) is really all that powerful.

shield of faith, sanctuary, enhance ability, enlarge/reduce, invisibility, fly, haste, and stoneskin all seem like potentially potent spell effects to infuse and hand to others so they can concentrate on them for you.


2) free magic items, yes, but it's in place of class features. Note that if you lose, break, or just use in some cases, the item you get, you have a permanently dead feature. Also, none of the items are hugely impactful combat wise- no +x weapons, no wand of magic missile, etc.

This might just be a result of the types of games I play. I'm used to gritty realism rules where magic items don't exist. The inclusion of multiple magic items as fundamental class features seems far more potent than most class features to me as a result. If you are used to magic items falling out of encounters like candy from a pinata, I imagine this feature is fairly lackluster.


3) yes, no sneak attack requirement, but if I had a thousand dollars for every time a rogue couldn't get sneak attack if they actually tried I'd still be dirt poor. Not to mention, sneak attack can be attempted twice by using twf, while these can't. As for the at will utility options, they really do pale in comparison to a wizard's spells.

As I mentioned above, I'm used to gritty realism; where the at-will nature of things is exceedingly valuable. If you are accustomed to resting between every encounter, at-will is basically worthless. Note, I'm not saying that is where you specifically are coming from, just citing it as an example of how the value of the features is colored by different perspectives.


4) reason for arcane trickster: more useful spell list; reason for eldritch knight: actually good dpr with GWM/SS; reason for ranger: combat useful spells, good dpr with CBM+hunter's mark+colossus slayer

The spell list being better is subjective. If you want to buff your team I'd say arcane trickster's spell list is decidedly worse. But I will grant the point that there are goals in which it would be superior. As for the eldritch knight's 'actually' good dpr: I see no reason why SS wouldn't be usable by a gunsmith artificer as well. 11d6+dex+10 is ~43.5 on a hit. Is that not decent? An EK using a greatsword is 4x 2d6+str (~48) without GWM assuming all 4 hit. Add GWM in and it becomes ~22 per hit, but without advantage you are unlikely to hit all 4 times. If you are fighting at range, you get 4x 1d8+dex+10 (~78) but again, you are unlikely to hit all 4. (each is ~19.5) As far as I am concerned, if agonizing eldritch blast is considered decent DPR (4x 1d10+cha = ~42) then so is gunsmith thunder cannon damage. The alchemist sublclass gets the ability to hit an area instead, which can result in more overall damage in lots of situations. As to the ranger, I'm not sure what CBM is but if you don't see any combat useful spells in the artificer list... well all I can say is that we play a very different kind of game. (and there is nothing wrong with that)


5) yes, that chain warlock with a 4hp familiar concentrating on a self-targeted spell is so terrifying that it hurts.

So I admit I sort of derped a little here. I forgot that familiars don't share spells in 5e and that infuse magic limited the spell to a 1 action casting time. My reaction was based on the idea that your familiar could buff you and maintain concentration on the buff while hiding in your cloak/robe/whatever. I also thought it might be useful to put glyph of warding in an infused item and have your familiar act as a mobile trap layer. Both of these things are actually not allowed, so this is far less abusive than I first believed.


6) use object =/= "as an action a creature can cast the spell".

I'm on the fence on this one. I think by RAW you may be right, but this is one of those rules lawyering aspects of 5e that has always bugged me. If I am activating a magic item that produces a spell, it seems like I am using the object. It takes a fair degree of suspension of disbelief to say using an object only applies to nonmagical objects because magical objects are somehow more complicated to use. It is certainly less abusive if you interpret it this way though.


7) wild shape druid not exactly impressive either, considering the options for the spell infusions.

I think this is a little dismissive. The artificer list isn't bad by any means. An enlarged wild shape would make for a scary grappler for example. It's probably not world shattering power of course, but it is something a druid can't naturally do until level 18.


Yes this class breaks some of the rules, but so does sorcerer- no one else can cast fireball as a bonus action... fighter also breaks the rules, by taking 2 actions in one turn... and the rogue, which gets +17 to checks in the system where bonuses aren't supposed to get very big... and the bard, who can have spells outside of their class list... and so on. the point is that the "broken rules" are broken in a way that doesn't send the whole jenga tower crashing down, just like all the existing ones. The only possible exception is the CR2 pet at level 6, but even then a full caster can conjure one of those up at level 5 if they don't care to do anything else with that L3 slot.


Not to say that the class is purely fine, but that's my views on your issues. The survey for this will be out in a week, we all have our vote in whether or not something's broken.

Fair enough. Personally, I think it needs to be toned down a bit. But I can see how some of that opinion is based on the style of game I am used to, which is probably not the style of game that most people play. I actually don't know how many players use the gritty realism rules, but I like them.

[Milo v3]

I really wish this class had something which made it so you can craft items for the amount the item is worth rather than being at a lot 99% of the time. How does eberron even function with everyone losing tonnes of money with every crafted item.

[Regitnui]

I really wish this class had something which made it so you can craft items for the amount the item is worth rather than being at a lot 99% of the time. How does eberron even function with everyone losing tonnes of money with every crafted item.

Sorry, what?

Eberron's magic item economy is driven by House Cannith. They set the prices, which coincidentally match those set out in the PHB, for all guild businesses as well as those who hold the Cannith Seal of Approval. The sort of items that adventurers are after, including +1 weapons, are not usually the main business of the House's guilds. Instead, they focus on everburning lamps or lightning reins; stuff that ordinary people or their fellow Dragonmarked Houses would buy. The world doesn't exist for adventurers, so adventurers' equipment is specialised and costly.

[Slayn82]

So ive been thinking about a character ill probobly use after my dino druid if not during that campaign if my dino druid dies but yeah.

Race: High Elf
Artificer Specialist: Gunsmith
probobly leave my stats to a roll.
Tools: the posioners kit and probobly a game set of some form
Skills: Investigation Nature Sleight of hand
starting weapons not sure dont think its really important since I have the gun altough ill probobly grab a bow from somewhere and build myself the bracers.
Background: Urban Bounty hunter.
Animal buddy: Rhino at this point
Feats depends on my rolls but probobly mounted combatant

Great concept. I love the idea. Poisoners kit is solid. Mounted combat is great too.

My second take (after the Warforged warlock3 -pact of weapon/artifice gunsmith called WARMACHINE) is a Variant Human Alchemist Artificer with Cooking/Poison/Healing tools proficiency, that UA Gourmand feat to recover 2 extra dice from their allies on long rest, with the Healing Draught and Fire Flask. His infusions will be the meals he cooks, and they last while people are digesting them.

Really, those two archetypes are very fun. They bring so many new ideas to the table. Artificers of any kind can probably demolish any type of fortification, destroying cover and eat stationary/paralysed targets.

The alchemists seem more dependent of their servant to grab the enemy, since there's a lot of reflex saves. On the other hand, Acid and Fire can really melt Melee oriented enemies who dump dexterity.

[Milo v3]

They set the prices, which coincidentally match those set out in the PHB, for all guild businesses as well as those who hold the Cannith Seal of Approval
They set those prices stupidly considering the creation costs are higher than the amount they are selling the items for when it comes to 99% of items (and the 1% they are breaking even rather than producing any profit).


Instead, they focus on everburning lamps or lightning reins; stuff that ordinary people or their fellow Dragonmarked Houses would buy. The world doesn't exist for adventurers, so adventurers' equipment is specialised and costly.
Crafting rules still apply to those.

[Zalabim]

The first thing I thought of when I read about the alchemist's bag:

http://www.nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Honey-Lemon-1.jpg

On reflection, I worry that having only fire and acid damage may result in some unpleasant encounters. I could see adding an alchemical mixing ability (as a bonus action) as a later feature to create more useful utility items or slightly more powerful damaging items, as well as the possibility for Thunderstone to deal some thunder damage to round out damage reliability. I like the option of Thunderstone not dealing damage as well though.

The gunsmith has better coverage for damage abilities but no utility abilities, so maybe healing draught and the spare bonus action is supposed to balance out the higher damage of the "thunderbuss".

[MinotaurWarrior]

I'm disappointed that the Alchemist doesn't do the mechanically cool things I liked about Alchemists. In particular, the lack of splash damage strikes me as strange, as reliable low level 'anti-goblin' pittances of damage is something 5e has the 'technology' for, and I'd think could be balanced around. But mostly I just want a couple of infusions they didn't replicate.

Large size is an interesting choice for the animal companion. Bad for dungeoneering, good for exploration. Also interesting how damned hard it is to switch forms. Like, I can see getting good use out of a Giant Octopus companion... sometimes.

Giant Eagles & Giant Owls are the only MM beasts capable of spellcasting with infused magic. I'm unclear on if the spellcasting DC would still use your proficiency bonus and also if this allows you to circumvent concentration limits by having your beast concentrate for you.

It's also unclear to me if either the alchemist or gunsmith special actions count as weapon attacks for things like favored enemy.

[Steampunkette]

Giant Vulture.

Intelligence of 6, deals 2d4+2 and 2d6+2, and has Pack Tactics.

The Giant Eagle does 1d6+3 and 2d6+3 and gets advantage on Perception.

Between the two, the Vulture is the better teammate for any Artificer, I think.

[Dman]

Depends what you want it for IMO, myself im probobly gonna use mounted combatant with a allosaurus or a rhino keep them close and take advantage of it being able to attack for me.

[Steampunkette]

But with a strength of 15 the Vulture can carry you into combat so you can throw Alchemical Fire from on high, raining DEATH FROM ABOOOOOOVE!

That Allosaurus damage, though...

[jaappleton]

Depends what you want it for IMO, myself im probobly gonna use mounted combatant with a allosaurus or a rhino keep them close and take advantage of it being able to attack for me.

DINORIDERS

ANYONE ELSE REMEMBER DINORIDERS?! Finally we can make that in D&D!

[Dman]

I guess it largely depends on enviroment too especially indoors and small areas. Although im looking at using Gunsmith myself

[MinotaurWarrior]

Giant Vulture.

Intelligence of 6, deals 2d4+2 and 2d6+2, and has Pack Tactics.

The Giant Eagle does 1d6+3 and 2d6+3 and gets advantage on Perception.

Between the two, the Vulture is the better teammate for any Artificer, I think.

Vulture multi+reaction = 7 + 9 + 9 = 25

G. Eagle multi+reaction = 6.5 + 10 +10 = 26.5

If you have another source of advantage, or can't pull of pack tactics for some reason, vulture loses. Also, it's possible for the Eagle's passive perception to be a big deal (It's 19 if based on sight), depending on party and campaign. Preventing surprise > small DPR boosts.

But yeah, Vulture is a very solid choice most of the time. I just wouldn't say "Any".

[VoxRationis]

A round is six seconds long. Assuming that you're aiming and firing with your action, your bonus action is spent dropping another load of ball bearings and exploding powder into the firing chamber. Cleaning is what you do after the troll screaming at you has stopped trying to rip your face off.

I'm not trying to argue about cleaning—though in fact cleaning is an integral part of the reloading process unless a firearm has clean-burning propellant that doesn't leave residue. Rather, I'm trying to point out that if you're spending more time aiming and firing the shot than you are preparing for the next one, you aren't using certain early firearm designs, because those simply do not fire that quickly. Trained professional soldiers, whose lives and livelihoods centered around firing one-shot gunpowder weapons, could not fire that quickly for centuries of firearm development.

[Regitnui]

They set those prices stupidly considering the creation costs are higher than the amount they are selling the items for when it comes to 99% of items (and the 1% they are breaking even rather than producing any profit).

How do you know? The Dragonmark of Making gives them a powerful edge over their competitors through dragonmark focus items. Try building a warforged by following the crafting rules... Cannith churned out armies of them. The setting is a cheater (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheComputerIsACheatingBastard), after all.


DINORIDERS

ANYONE ELSE REMEMBER DINORIDERS?! Finally we can make that in D&D!

Hi, meet the Talenta halflings from Eberron.

https://haroldshomebrewworld.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/49.jpg


I'm not trying to argue about cleaning—though in fact cleaning is an integral part of the reloading process unless a firearm has clean-burning propellant that doesn't leave residue. Rather, I'm trying to point out that if you're spending more time aiming and firing the shot than you are preparing for the next one, you aren't using certain early firearm designs, because those simply do not fire that quickly. Trained professional soldiers, whose lives and livelihoods centered around firing one-shot gunpowder weapons, could not fire that quickly for centuries of firearm development.

Good thing they're not using "certain early firearm designs". :smalltongue: It's a magic THUNDER CANNON! *Lightning flashes*

Sorry, I just had to shout that.:smallredface: Seriously, though. I suggested the fire lance for an alternative look, hoping to inspire minds beyond the immediate Colt .45, double-barrel shotgun and other stereotypes when someone mentions the word 'gun' near D&D. Why doesn't it work the way it should according to our physics? Clearly, an artificer did it (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AWizardDidIt)!

[Milo v3]

How do you know? The Dragonmark of Making gives them a powerful edge over their competitors through dragonmark focus items. Try building a warforged by following the crafting rules... Cannith churned out armies of them. The setting is a cheater (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheComputerIsACheatingBastard), after all.
When you have to handwave the crafting system away because this is how your crafting economy works (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0135.html), you know you've made artificers wrong.

[Caelestion]

They set those prices stupidly considering the creation costs are higher than the amount they are selling the items for when it comes to 99% of items (and the 1% they are breaking even rather than producing any profit).

Only the breaking even bit matches my understanding of the system at all. Perhaps you could justify the other 99% bit?

[Milo v3]

Only the breaking even bit matches my understanding of the system at all. Perhaps you could justify the other 99% bit?

The creation cost of an item in 5e is equal to the highest price that items of that category are worth (to deal with the fact different games and different locations in those games will have different prices for the items). For example, because common items are worth between 50 gp and 100 gp, creating a common magic item (even one that would only cost 50 gp to purchase) will require spending 100 gp to craft. As items worth will be dispersed within that range, the amount of items which will be worth exactly the maximum amount for that category is expected to be immensely tiny.

[Regitnui]

When you have to handwave the crafting system away because this is how your crafting economy works (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0135.html), you know you've made artificers wrong.

Three things:

1. That's not criticising the crafting system, but the individual store protrayed in the comic. In other words, market dynamics are being explained, not the crafting system.
2. The comic is based around 3.5 rules, not 5e. Crafting worked differently then to how it does now.
3. The UA Artificer presented does not explicitly add crafting rules beyond "pay so much and spend so many days to regain class feature".

For good measure:

Warforged knights in adamantium armour holding thunder cannons riding construct bears fighting zombies armed with flaming swords. The awesomeness has invalidated your counterargument. :smallcool:

[Caelestion]

The creation cost of an item in 5e...

Ah. Given that you were citing OotS to support your argument, I assumed that we were discussing 3E creation rules.

[Milo v3]

Three things:

1. That's not criticising the crafting system, but the individual store protrayed in the comic. In other words, market dynamics are being explained, not the crafting system.
I think you've misunderstood. Because of the crafting system of 5e, every magic item store must operate in the same way if you use the rulesets provided.

2. The comic is based around 3.5 rules, not 5e. Crafting worked differently then to how it does now.
Yes, I'm aware. In 3.5e, that store would only happen because they really screwed up their profession checks. In 5e, if you don't handwave it, that IS how magic stores work.

The UA Artificer presented does not explicitly add crafting rules beyond "pay so much and spend so many days to regain class feature".
I'm aware. My view is that it not having any ability which aid in crafting magic items (you know, the entire concept of the class) is dumb, when it could have been the perfect opportunity to make crafting items less broken. Doesn't even need to make it optimised or anything, just make it less pathetic and broken. I mean, it takes nearly 55 years to craft some items, even if you're a level 20 artificer for godsake.


Warforged knights in adamantium armour holding thunder cannons riding construct bears fighting zombies armed with flaming swords. The awesomeness has invalidated your counterargument. :smallcool:
"yay, they turned the artificer into a knight" :smallsigh:


Ah. Given that you were citing OotS to support your argument, I assumed that we were discussing 3E creation rules.
I wasn't using it to support my argument that those are the rules, it simply shows how ridiculous it is having to sell all of a store's magic items at a lower price than it is to manufacture. Which is what happens with the 5e rules.

[Caelestion]

Clearly, making magic items in 5E is an afterthought and that's all that need be said.

[EvilAnagram]

Im thinking give the construct to Alchemists as a subclass ability, & extra attack to Gunsmiths.
Why would you defenestrate game balance like that? Game balance never hurt you!

At the moment, the Gunsmith essentially has sneak attack damage. Giving him extra attack gives him double that and makes him by far the most potent damage dealer in the game.


Expand the spell list a touch, maybe let the artificer borrow a spell like a bard every so often.
Again, this is a balance point. Their list is limited because they can let others cast their spells in an entirely novel way. Expanding their list too much or letting them poach spells kills the balance.


As for the list of magic items...
I dont know whether it needs expanding or just retooled altogether. It offers an odd assortment of varying power.

That sounds like an Artifice to me.

Personally, I think they should make a temporary magic item that last 24 hours off that list.

[VoxRationis]

Or we just accept that 5e returns to the old-school premise where 90-99% of magic items were made in a past period of glory and anyone making them now isn't doing so for the purpose of mere commercial profit (and conversely, anyone selling them has found them, not made them). The prices aren't reflecting the margins of anyone trying to make a business of magic item creation, because they aren't the source of what few magical items are actually on the market.

[Anderlith]

Why would you defenestrate game balance like that? Game balance never hurt you!


Nothing is going out the window. I'm just thinking what to give Gunsmith to replace the construct ability. It was late, I wasn't thinking. Maybe something else idk

[Regitnui]

Or we just accept that 5e returns to the old-school premise where 90-99% of magic items were made in a past period of glory and anyone making them now isn't doing so for the purpose of mere commercial profit (and conversely, anyone selling them has found them, not made them). The prices aren't reflecting the margins of anyone trying to make a business of magic item creation, because they aren't the source of what few magical items are actually on the market.

Or we accept that the PC artificer class is not the type of person who sits in a workshop making items for everyone else, but is the sort of bloke who makes bombs out of common kitchen spices he found while the kobolds were trying to eat him. Pointing out, of course, that the PC artificer should be making money by kicking a xorn so hard in its sensitives that it pukes gold coins, not standing at a stall selling vorpal arrowheads to elves for copper pieces.

[DizzyWood]

3. I'm not a big fan of guns in D&D, but that's a small thing as I could easily change it to a wood carver expertise and make it a wand instead of a gun with no effort at all.

This was my first thought. My second was why didn't they just make it a wand calls to begin with. I mean I like this but wands just FEEL more D&D.

[Shaofoo]

They should put a cap on the amount of ammo you can have at any one time or somehow make it that shot only last a minute outside of the pouch or gun. Otherwise we will have people go "Hurrdurr I can make infinite ammo so I can have infinite money I win D&D foreva!".

[Lord Raziere]

I am in love with this class.

I've NEVER liked Artificers in D&D. I always thought they came across as wizards with some doofy gimmicks like 3e's "Candlecaster"

But this? This is a character I would delightedly play. In fact I want to make a dwarven Artificer with a thundergun.

And I don't even PLAY dwarves.

I'll be honest- this is exactly what I want from an artificer. none of the spreadsheet stupidity, just Bomb, devices, mechanical companion and magical GUN.

[Nishant]

They should put a cap on the amount of ammo you can have at any one time or somehow make it that shot only last a minute outside of the pouch or gun. Otherwise we will have people go "Hurrdurr I can make infinite ammo so I can have infinite money I win D&D foreva!".

Isn't this a player problem? And what would the market be for th ammunition?

[Garresh]

Given that Sneak Attack damage falls behind pure martial or ranged damage in a big way past level 9(don't have dpr handy. look it up), and this class is balanced around sneak attack scaling minus weapon damage, it seems to a degree that the Construct is part of the base class to keep it viable. However, the Construct really steps on the Beastmaster's toes. Especially for those key levels 6-9 where its actually superior to the beastmaster's pet.

I don't have a proposal ready just yet, but I'm going to have a mock up ready by later tonight. What I think would tie this all together would be to lower the CR of the construct to 1, and give it scaling like the Ranger's pet, with a few big changes.

1. Much lower damage scaling. No specifics yet, but let ranger retain the badass damage pet.
2. No skill bonuses/scaling. Constructs don't get skills so they can't be as good for utility as a ranger pet.
3. Significantly increased durability and "tanking" potential. Essentially let their pet shoot up to Fighter-range AC and HP, and get some limited "tanking" tools like Protection style or a significantly weakened Sentinel feature.

Since it lacks damage output and has much weakened features relative to a true tank, it won't step on Ranger pets or frontline fighters. But it will still provide some combat utility and can act as a decent mount as well due to size. It is my hope that such a proposal will smooth out the power curve, give this class a bit more of a reliable role as a sort of utility controller, and avoid conflicts of role wherein the Artificer steals the limelight from specialists.

Barring any specifics yet, what do you guys think of this concept change for the construct?

[SharkForce]

Isn't this a player problem? And what would the market be for th ammunition?

particularly considering your primary target market are exclusively of people who can also make an infinite ammo supply for free :P

[Theodoric]

Isn't this a player problem? And what would the market be for th ammunition?
Probably none, since it's experimental and so tied to a specific singular weapon; with an infinite supply and low demand it'd be worthless. These sorts of infinite-product tricks are based on gaming the system, which shouldn't work when there's am actual person GM-ing (that's kind-of the whole point of having one of those). You're right, it's more of a problem with people than with the game itself.

[EvilAnagram]

This was my first thought. My second was why didn't they just make it a wand calls to begin with. I mean I like this but wands just FEEL more D&D.

It's an artificer. Artificers have always been about bombs and mechanical nonsense.


That said, I think there is a consensus that the artificer is either brilliant or absolutely awful, which is pretty much the standard reaction to any D&D class. Kudos to WotC.

[Sicarius Victis]

At the moment, the Gunsmith essentially has sneak attack damage. Giving him extra attack gives him double that and makes him by far the most potent damage dealer in the game.

Yes, exactly. Except, you know, not. The SA-level damage comes from a specific Action besides the Attack Action. Taking the Attack Action which is required for Extra Attack, actively prevents them from doing that damage.

[CursedRhubarb]

Class stat priority looks like it would be a little different between the two. Alchemist looks like you could do great with Int>Dex>Con since it looks like your main attacks are save-or-effect (think this means you can chuck an acid vial at someone 5' away with no penalty since it isn't an attack roll) while Gunsmith looks like you'd want Dex>Int>Con as you attack with a ranged weapon so it looks to be Dex attack rolls.

I want to make an Alchemist and pick Poisoner's kit and Herbalism kit for tool choice. Use some of that downtime to make potions, lotions, and poisons and the pure variety of vials he'd be using would be impressive. For close range melee backup keep a dagger or two but use a bow or crossbow for longer range, with poisoned arrows, and switch to mad bomber mode when things close in and get in throwing range. Downtime can be spent setting up a shop to get an income started to fund the explorations in search of new ingredients and ideas...And recruitment for test subjects. I mean, I can't really judge a potions effects if I'm incapacitated from a bad mixture now can I? Have to find some gullible, I mean...Willing participants for scientific study.