The artificer returns

[Rafaelfras]

More content to the Artifice. Here’s what’s been added:


New subclasses—the Archivist and the Battle Smith
A revised spell list, including spells from Xanathar’s Guide to Everything
New infusions—Enhanced Wand, Repeating Shot, and Repulsion Shield
A revision to multiclassing—round up when determining spell slots


https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/UA-Artificer2-2019.pdf

[rmnimoc]

Fun fact I noticed, as written you can't actually be an Archivist or Battle Smith:


At 3rd level, you choose the type of specialist you
are: Alchemist or Artillerist, each of which is
detailed at the end of the class’s description.
Your choice grants you features at 3rd level and
again at 6th and 14th level.

Kind of lazy of them to just copy-paste the abilities from before without double-checking them.

[jaappleton]

They get Faerie Fire now.

YOU ARE ALL WELCOME.

[nickl_2000]

So an artificer is the first half caster with cantrips. Does that mean I can take Magic Initiate Artificer and get Arcane Weapon and 2 cantrips?

[jaappleton]

So an artificer is the first half caster with cantrips. Does that mean I can take Magic Initiate Artificer and get Arcane Weapon and 2 cantrips?

The feat for it doesn’t exist yet. But it certainly seems to meet all the qualifications.

[Daphne]

INT to attack and damge rolls? Please, no...

[Frozenstep]

Wow, archivist looks insanely strong. You basically have an int saving throw cantrip that does decent damage (and it's psychic!) and gives the next attack advantage, and you can basically smite on it after you see it work, and you add your int mod to the damage after level 6, and it automatically adds another int saving throw to stun if you use a spell slot after level 14? Yikes, that's potent.

[claypigeons]

Any damage roll you make for a cantrip in the wand gains a bonus equal to your intelligence modifier (minimum +1).

If you put Eldritch Blast in your prototype, do you get Agonizing Blast without the dip?

That is, does each beam benefit, since each is a separate attack and damage roll?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Huh. Archivist is... weird. Effective, sure-- Information Overload is like a souped-up True Strike and a better-positioned Toll the Dead all at once, and you can smite with it? For some reason?-- but fluff-wise? The artificial mind... that's in a material object, except when it's manifesting intangibly around you? And I'm not sure what any of it has to do with crafting or magic items?

Battle Smith looks awesome, though. Medium armor, Int-based attacks, robot puppy? Hell yeah. Finally a decent smart-gish that feels right.

Repeating Shot is kind of neat-- I think it's the only way to effectively use a heavy crossbow without wasting most of a feat, like how Returning Weapon allows for thrown weapon builds. Is it just me, or is an Artificer dip starting to look like the martial version of the Warlock? Hex Arcane Weapon, +1 attack, damage, and AC via Infusions if you take a second level, a decent bonus action option if you take a third... it's tempting for anyone who's already gotten their Extra Attack.

[ProsecutorGodot]

INT to attack and damge rolls? Please, no...

Is it really going to hurt the game that much? Wizards (save for maybe bladesingers) certainly aren't going to be clambering for the opportunity to be a melee fighter and EK tend not to prioritize Intelligence over strength as it is.

Hexblade is a unique issue, in that it keys off Charisma (the main stat to some of the most powerful classes in 5e) and is available as soon as 1st level.


If you put Eldritch Blast in your prototype, do you get Agonizing Blast without the dip?

That is, does each beam benefit, since each is a separate attack and damage roll?
Like the last iteration, Eldritch Blast can't be loaded into the wand because the wand only allows Artificer Cantrips. You would be correct in this though, if it were allowed you could even stack its bonus with Agonizing Blast. Something tells me this is one of many reasons that the prototype wand has such a limitation.

[KorvinStarmast]

Kind of lazy of them to just copy-paste the abilities from before without double-checking them. The usual UA sloppy work, and why this addition will not be part of our play test of Artificer in the game I began last week.
WoTC: Bloat B Us.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Hey! There's that arcane half-caster gish I was hoping they'd make! It even looks halfway respectable!

The archivist returns as a mentat? Seems weird as an artificer instead of a wizard.

[claypigeons]

Like the last iteration, Eldritch Blast can't be loaded into the wand because the wand only allows Artificer Cantrips. You would be correct in this though, if it were allowed you could even stack its bonus with Agonizing Blast. Something tells me this is one of many reasons that the prototype wand has such a limitation.

Oops, missed that on my read through. Thank you

[Rukelnikov]

Welp, battle smith looks really good, it's high up in my list of "to play" now.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Welp, battle smith looks really good, it's high up in my list of "to play" now.

Seeing how the battle smith is now makes me regret having my Artificer rolled up into Artillerist. If I'm being honest, the two new subclasses make me see the first two as pretty pathetic in comparison.

That's maybe a bit harsh but the new subclasses don't give me the feeling that they're struggling for an identity. Artillerist felt a bit weird with the split between turret/wand/weapon as a means of attack and Alchemist just felt a bit lacking in the later level features. Archivist might be the thing that I can finally get my brother (a 4e player obsessed with psionics) to roll up and play.

[Millstone85]

The battle smith is the new swordmage. :smallsmile:

[Man_Over_Game]

What are your guys' opinions as to why the Battle Smith is likeable, but the Beast Master is not?

[jaappleton]

What are your guys' opinions as to why the Battle Smith is likeable, but the Beast Master is not?

Action Economy. Artificer makes much better use of action economy.

[jaappleton]

But seriously...

Awhile ago, I tweeted Jeremy Crawford that Artificers should get Faerie Fire. Why?

“Because throwing a grenade filled with magic glitter and turning the battlefield into a Ke$ha music video is EXACTLY what an Artificer should do.”

He agreed. :smallbiggrin:

[ProsecutorGodot]

What are your guys' opinions as to why the Battle Smith is likeable, but the Beast Master is not?

Better action economy. You can command it with a bonus action compared to a beast master using their action. Rangers get one weapon attack and a beast attack (which is probably fairly weak) where Artificer gets to attack twice and also use a bonus action to command the beast to attack.

It feels less like you're sacrificing your characters fun. That's my take on it anyway.

[Fnissalot]

You could still flavour the artillerists turret as a selfshooting wand with legs. I am fine with the artillerist but I think the alchemist looks comparably weak. Poison is a crappy damage type and there are not enough acid damage spells to carry it.

Information overload is probably one of the best cantrips/cantrip-likes in the game and you can smite and stun with it. This is insane!

Battlesmith looks like a good gish and a better beast master ranger. That will stay alive longer than the beastmasters beast and it improves more as you level.

Repeating shot lets you use a sling/handcrossbow and a shield at the same time! Noice! I really like the infusions!

[Rukelnikov]

What are your guys' opinions as to why the Battle Smith is likeable, but the Beast Master is not?

Int to att and dam coupled with magic weapon and armor at lvl 2 and an improved hex

[Waterdeep Merch]

What are your guys' opinions as to why the Battle Smith is likeable, but the Beast Master is not?

The robopup acts on a bonus action and it gets magic attacks innately. It's also easier to replace, has more HP, can do some weird miniature heal-smite, self-repair, is a perfect watchdog, immune to poison, an excellent defensive reaction, cooler flavor, etc. etc. Oh, and that's not the only thing you get for the subclass. It would be reasonably useful (though boring and uninspired) if Int to attack/damage and martial weapons is all it got.

The artificer is also an innately more fun chassis than the ranger, with a bevy of cantrips, ritual casting, more interesting utility spells, infusions, built-in crafting, and can play in every aspect of the game without invalidating specific ones.

[Misterwhisper]

Why do they bother releasing this garbage in the first place?

They know that there is no chance a class sees print that is a half caster and gets cantrips.

It is just the crappy MM version that has 2 op subclasses racked on by someone who doesn’t understand balance.

Also replicating returning would be great other than returning is not a property possible in the game because it will not be added to any charts for the dmg.

This level of lazy pointlessness is unacceptable.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Why do they bother releasing this garbage in the first place?
Because people have asked for this, for years.


They know that there is no chance a class sees print that is a half caster and gets cantrips.
We live in a post Hexblade world, anything goes at this point. This specific version is definitely not going to see print but I wouldn't be surprised if a more refined version eventually did. Things don't end up in Unearthed Arcana under the assumption that they will never see print, but that they might not. They wouldn't be testing things that they didn't think had a bit of promise in them.

I'd argue that despite everything this new iteration of the Artificer is fairly well received. It helps that Keith Baker is somewhat involved in the design process for this class.


It is just the crappy MM version that has 2 op subclasses racked on by someone who doesn’t understand balance.
This is definitely a bit of a sticking point but it's better to start iterating when something is too strong and tone it down than start it too weak and struggle to tune it up.


Also replicating returning would be great other than returning is not a property possible in the game because it will not be added to any charts for the dmg.
I suppose Dwarven Thrower's returning property and the fact that combining magical item effects is already in the DMG is easy to miss.


This level of lazy pointlessness is unacceptable.
Yes, they should probably have done a double check on features that referenced the available subclasses, but I think it's unfair to say that it's a total hack job. There are a few changes that I didn't think they would bother addressing, such as expanding the base class list with spells outside of Xanathar's and the fact that they fixed the spell slot progression issue when multiclassing.

It certainly doesn't help when there's a vocal majority of people demanding more content and then that vocal group overlapping with those displeased with the content they received.

[Kane0]

Why do they bother releasing this garbage in the first place?

They know that there is no chance a class sees print that is a half caster and gets cantrips.

It is just the crappy MM version that has 2 op subclasses racked on by someone who doesn’t understand balance.

Also replicating returning would be great other than returning is not a property possible in the game because it will not be added to any charts for the dmg.

This level of lazy pointlessness is unacceptable.

Because we never stop asking for more

No less likely than GFB/BB and Hexblade if you ask me

Fair point, but remember the premise of UA was supposed to be for playtesting and critique prior to a official release

Same problem as Artificers not being able to use a bunch of DMG magic items that specify certain caster classes to attune

I disagree, I think it's worth something.

[GlenSmash!]

Alchemist might make a decent 5e Witcher.

[Mjolnirbear]

Why do they bother releasing this garbage in the first place?

They know that there is no chance a class sees print that is a half caster and gets cantrips.

It is just the crappy MM version that has 2 op subclasses racked on by someone who doesn’t understand balance.

Also replicating returning would be great other than returning is not a property possible in the game because it will not be added to any charts for the dmg.

This level of lazy pointlessness is unacceptable.

At what point did you forget that this is test material and not allowed in official play?

At what point did you forget that this is free content?

At what point did you forget that Wizards does not work for you?

At what point did you forget that Wizards are the ones who set the standards with half-casters and cantrips and are perfectly capable of thinking outside their own box?

If you are unsatisfied with their unofficial, free, optional material, feel free to make your own instead of insulting content creators who are doing more for this hobby than you are.

Someone who apparently has never had to deal with something so basic as adding homebrew magic items into their game is not someone whose complaints carry any weight with me, especially when delivered with such thoughtless vitriol like some Karen demanding to speak to the manager for some imagined slight.

[LudicSavant]

Glad to see the Multiclassing thing addressed, at least.

Some quick impressions (haven't gotten to go over the new subclasses yet):
- Soul of Artifice seems very topheavy; moreso than other capstones.
- It has 6 "-" levels and a few levels with what is essentially just ribbons on top of that. These levels coincide with either getting a new spell level or new infusion known. For comparison, other half-casters have 3 "-" levels.
- Alchemist spell list seems a little underwhelming. Melf's Acid Arrow is about as useful as Witch Bolt, for example.

[jas61292]

Hoo boy.

I was never particularly attached to Artificer as a concept, but I really liked where this class was going with the last release. But these two new sub-classes are a bit much.

Archivist has a ranged cantrip like ability that keys off an uncommon and generally weak save, deals a fantastic damage type, has a powerful rider effect, AND lets you smite with it. Oh, and at higher levels you get Int to that damage, and then later on that smite can stun. Now, to be fair, it will likely require a bonus action to get it in position, and then an action to actually use the attack, and it is not an actual cantrip and so won't increase damage if you multiclass. But damn, that is incredibly good. Also you get some great spells and a ton of utility abilities.

That all being said, the Battle Smith makes all that look pathetic. Better version of the entire Beast Master Ranger Subclass: Check. Extra attack: Check. Using your main stat for attack and damage instead of the normal stat: Check. This is just stupid. Either make the subclass focused on the beast, or make it focused on being in melee. The fact that it literally is a better beastmaster subclass on a better main class chassis is already bad enough, but adding in personal melee capability on top is just wrong. Literally the only saving grace there is that its a level 3 subclass so its not as prone to multiclass shenanigans as Hexblade.

I want to like this class, but these two new subclasses just feel less inspired and overpowered.

[Rukelnikov]

Glad to see the Multiclassing thing addressed, at least.

Some quick impressions:
- Soul of Artifice seems very topheavy; moreso than other capstones.
- It has 6 "-" levels and a few levels with what is essentially just ribbons on top of that. These levels coincide with either getting a new spell level or new infusion known. For comparison, other half-casters have 3 "-" levels.
- Alchemist spell list seems a little underwhelming. Melf's Acid Arrow is about as useful as Witch Bolt, for example.

While the Alchemists list is indeed somewhat underwhelming (especially when compared to the other subclasses), consider that basic Artificer spell list is, aside from cantrips, (almost) entirely void of damaging spells, I was very suprised to see the addition of Vitriolic Sphere to the list, since that makes it the only direct damaging spell in its list.

So in such a list, even when MAA is indeed a pretty crappy spell, it's a damaging one, something it didn't have on its list, and its more damaging than the attack roll cantrips available from level 6 to 10(2d10 vs 4d4+Int). So it has a use for those artificers maxing Int instead of Dex.

[Mikal]

I’m not a super fan of artificer being the official pet class, but the Battle Smith does mechanically give me more variety in my Gish Brothers idea:
Four brothers, one an EK, one an AT, one a Hexblade, and now one a Battle Smith, each using a different stat for attacking, each using different spell casting, each with a different style of martial combat...

[LudicSavant]

While the Alchemists list is indeed somewhat underwhelming (especially when compared to the other subclasses), consider that basic Artificer spell list is, aside from cantrips, (almost) entirely void of damaging spells, I was very suprised to see the addition of Vitriolic Sphere to the list, since that makes it the only direct damaging spell in its list.

So in such a list, even when MAA is indeed a pretty crappy spell, it's a damaging one, something it didn't have on its list, and its more damaging than the attack roll cantrips available from level 6 to 10(2d10 vs 4d4+Int). So it has a use for those artificers maxing Int instead of Dex.

Some other damaging options for the same Alchemist who can use that 4d4+Int option:

Poison Spray for 2d12+Int, using no spell slot.

Ray of Sickness from the same 2nd level spell slot for 3d8+Int damage and a Poisoned status effect rider.

Unrelated: I notice that the Beastmaster's infamous / controversial mechanic is coming back for the Artificer's homunculus. So it's basically a remote-controlled robot that is incapable of acting independently from you.

[EdenIndustries]

I’m not a super fan of artificer being the official pet class, but the Battle Smith does mechanically give me more variety in my Gish Brothers idea:
Four brothers, one an EK, one an AT, one a Hexblade, and now one a Battle Smith, each using a different stat for attacking, each using different spell casting, each with a different style of martial combat...

This is awesome, I love theorycrafted teams with a fun theme!

[Mikal]

This is awesome, I love theorycrafted teams with a fun theme!

Yeah originally it included a paladin and ranger, but with this option I can make it more fleshed out/unique, even if I hate the pet classes (personal preference)

[Rukelnikov]

Some other damaging options for the same Alchemist who can use that 4d4+Int option:

Poison Spray for 2d12+Int, using no spell slot.

Ray of Sickness from the same 2nd level spell slot for 3d8+Int damage and a Poisoned status effect rider.

Unrelated: I notice that the Beastmaster's infamous / controversial mechanic is coming back for the Artificer's homunculus. So it's basically a remote-controlled robot that is incapable of acting independently from you.

Yeah, but poison spray is save instead of attack and deals poison instead of acid, and Ray of Sickness is concentration IIRC.

EDIT: just checked, RoS is not concentration, it deals poison though, but yeah, the usefulness of MAA is diminished even further.

[LudicSavant]

Ray of Sickness is concentration IIRC.

Ray of Sickness does not require Concentration.

[Kane0]

- I don't mind cantrips being thrown in but i'd like for the half caster progression to match the paladin and ranger.
- Arcane Armament is still a bit weird in my head. It's either just Extra Attack or an infusion tax
- I still think the extra attunements of Soul of Artifice should be spread out over your levels, especially since your infusions use attunement
- I still don't like the alchemical homunculous. A pet for every subclass is not necessary and I would argue is detrimental (takes up design space and makes subclasses less distinguishable rather than more)
- The later alchemist abilities are still relatively lacklustre
- Archivist really needs toning down. level 3 grants interchageable skills + super-familiar + uber-cantrip that can be smite boosted and gets better at 6 and 14, level 6 is interplanar communication, level 14 is 2nd level spell slot teleports.
- Artillerist is still meh. Turrets and wands thematically don't mesh well within the same subclass, I would have preferred something like a staff you plant for auras instead of the turret
- Battle Smith also needs toning down. You get a better beastmaster companion (which is fine, but if we can have this and it works then DO IT FOR THE RANGER THEN), Int to damage ala hexblade plus all the smite spells, IDS or actionless/resourceless heals at level 6 and an improvement to all of the above at level 14
- Infusions are still meh. The majority are boring +1s or 'choose a magic item', we need more things like the boots of the winding path and many-handed pouch. The ones that improve problematic combat options like returning weapon aren't bad but I would argue is the wrong place to put them, much like MMs ranger-exclusive TWF style.

Overall, good but still needs work. If we iterate on what's here we could end up with something really solid.

Edit: Oh, and still has the dead levels and lack of backwards-compatibility with previously released magic items, which you'd think an artificer would be all over.

[jaappleton]

To those of you commenting about Artificers and them getting Cantrips:

IIRC, when they were first introduced in 3.X, Artificers were 2/3rd casters.

That... doesn't exist in 5E.

This is as faithful of a representation as they can get. Personally, I'm fine with them getting cantrips. Frankly, ALL HALF CASTERS SHOULD GET CANTRIPS, if you ask me. Half casters have more magical acumen than one third casters, but half casters don't have cantrips? Really? That's just dumb as hell.

Additionally, Artificers have spellcasting available at lv1. This makes them further unique.

[Rukelnikov]

To those of you commenting about Artificers and them getting Cantrips:

IIRC, when they were first introduced in 3.X, Artificers were 2/3rd casters.

That... doesn't exist in 5E.

This is as faithful of a representation as they can get. Personally, I'm fine with them getting cantrips. Frankly, ALL HALF CASTERS SHOULD GET CANTRIPS, if you ask me. Half casters have more magical acumen than one third casters, but half casters don't have cantrips? Really? That's just dumb as hell.

Additionally, Artificers have spellcasting available at lv1. This makes them further unique.

I don't mind the cantrips, but it does bother me that they don't follow one of the patterns by just one level, they could start casting at lvl 2 and get infusions at 1, I guess the "problem" with that is the 1 lvl dip for magic arms and armor, but tbh after lvl 7 or so, it doesn't matter much.

[GlenSmash!]

I'm just waiting for these updates to hit dnd beyond so i can start playing with them a bit more.


I don't mind the cantrips, but it does bother me that they don't follow one of the patterns by just one level, they could start casting at lvl 2 and get infusions at 1, I guess the "problem" with that is the 1 lvl dip for magic arms and armor, but tbh after lvl 7 or so, it doesn't matter much.

I think I'd like that switch too.

[Kane0]

They also get magical tinkering at level 1, that's like the infusion version of a cantrip.

[jaappleton]

I don't mind the cantrips, but it does bother me that they don't follow one of the patterns by just one level, they could start casting at lvl 2 and get infusions at 1, I guess the "problem" with that is the 1 lvl dip for magic arms and armor, but tbh after lvl 7 or so, it doesn't matter much.

I can understand your apprehension about that, but its not very different from dipping certain Cleric Domains. Heck, Forge 1 nets you heavy armor proficiency and +1 AC just for existing.

[Rukelnikov]

I can understand your apprehension about that, but its not very different from dipping certain Cleric Domains. Heck, Forge 1 nets you heavy armor proficiency and +1 AC just for existing.

Exactly, they should've just made it Infusions at 1, casting at 2.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Exactly, they should've just made it Infusions at 1, casting at 2.

What exactly then does the intelligence based class have to defend themselves at the deadliest level of the adventure? It doesn't really sell the idea that you're skilled with magic from the get go if you're relegated to a crossbow until some undefined time after your career begins.

[Rukelnikov]

What exactly then does the intelligence based class have to defend themselves at the deadliest level of the adventure? It doesn't really sell the idea that you're skilled with magic from the get go if you're relegated to a crossbow until some undefined time after your career begins.

You get infusions at lvl 1, which is the unique trait of the Artificers, and cantrips would be ok at 1st too.

[ProsecutorGodot]

You get infusions at lvl 1, which is the unique trait of the Artificers, and cantrips would be ok at 1st too.

It seems overly complicated to divorce certain rules of spellcasting from their level 1 just because you don't think they should be casting level spells at 1st level. They either get spellcasting, and all that it entails at level 1, or they get it all at level 2. It's only going to confuse those who would be learning the game for the first time on why every other class has all of their spellcasting rules found in the same block but Artificers have a seperated one for some reason.

Why can't level 1 spellcasting be a unique feature for them as well? What does it hurt? Is it really a bad thing that someone actually decided not to dump Int for once and is able to multiclass into it?

[Wildarm]

Very happy with the class update. In particular, sharp shooter alchemists are now possible without a feat tax!

Fighter 1/Alchemist Artillerist X - Sharpshooter Feat, Archery FS, Repeating Heavy Crossbow +1

2 Attacks - 1d10 + 1(Magic Bonus) +1d6 Acid(Arcane Weapon) + 5(Dex) + 10(SS)
1 Bonus Action Attack - Force Ballista - 2d8 Force

Alternately, taking Crossbow Expert means you can get a repeating hand crossbow and still equip a shield:

3 Attacks - 2d6+16 each

No need to be an Artillerist in that case, choose Fighter 1/Alchemist Battle Smith X and you don't even need to invest in Dex. Wear plate(even with movement penalty) - Easy 20AC and fire your hand crossbow using Int! Plus you have your robo dog guard you will you pepper the enemy with acid bolts. And you have half caster abilities and more infusions for things like repulsion shield and +1 plate. Tank all day. Absorb Elements for extra resilience.

Lack of wisdom save proficiency is the main vulnerability I think.

Strongly considering it for my next build that I get to roll for stats!

Also bonus points for a Winged Tiefling who can get permission to create a +1 repeating musket. Rain down hellfire from the skies.

[Tetrasodium]

To those of you commenting about Artificers and them getting Cantrips:

IIRC, when they were first introduced in 3.X, Artificers were 2/3rd casters.

That... doesn't exist in 5E.

This is as faithful of a representation as they can get. Personally, I'm fine with them getting cantrips. Frankly, ALL HALF CASTERS SHOULD GET CANTRIPS, if you ask me. Half casters have more magical acumen than one third casters, but half casters don't have cantrips? Really? That's just dumb as hell.

Additionally, Artificers have spellcasting available at lv1. This makes them further unique.



I agree, people overlook the fact that paladin/ranger were half (1/3?) casters in 3.5 when comparing the 5e 1/2 casters with the 5e half caster cantrips at 1st artificer & only look at the cantrips


With that said.... The extra attack should be moved from the base class to thebattlesmith & the other casterific archtypes should get a changable cantrip wand scaled down version of the spell storing item at that level. I'd also like to see something done about the virtually stationary, time limited summon limited turrets on the artillerist as there are just too many limitations there.

[Bloodcloud]

I really don't get the hate for a slightly different half caster... I think it's fine? I get they wanted the magic to kick in at 1 but not full caster.

I agree some more work is needed. "Dead" levels are too many. Distributing extra attunement slot seems like an easy partial fix for that.

Focus on pet is a little much for me too. Artillerist should have a non-mobile canon wand/staff option. Maybe if the pet was one of a few boon like the warlock...

Overall, I like this version, and look foward to iterations.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I really don't get the hate for a slightly different half caster... I think it's fine? I get they wanted the magic to kick in at 1 but not full caster.

I agree some more work is needed. "Dead" levels are too many. Distributing extra attunement slot seems like an easy partial fix for that.

Focus on pet is a little much for me too. Artillerist should have a non-mobile canon wand/staff option. Maybe if the pet was one of a few boon like the warlock...

Overall, I like this version, and look foward to iterations.

The dead levels are a hold over from casters not getting class features when they gain higher level spell slots. I think it's meant to emphasise the feel that, like Jaapleton pointed out, they're closer to a 2/3 caster than a 1/2 caster. I'm of the opinion, however, that the class feels lacking because of those gaps. It also doesn't at all justify the 7th and 11th level gaps where they don't even gain a higher level spell slot. The scaling feels off and I wouldn't be surprised to hear that a player felt that those levels were unrewarding.'

First impressions make me think that some of the empty levels could be used to allow subclass specific infusions. It's awfully convenient that 7th and 11th level both give you an additional infusion known.

[Mitchellnotes]

I think the greatest issue with this class still persists in that it natively gets several items that make stat gains moot. The battle smiths int to attack is a lot less meaningful when somewhere along the way you can just set various stats at 19.

That being said, a dartthrowing sharpshooter battlesmith riding its beast is now possible...which is interesting i suppose.

Also, ditto on the archivist wierdness. I get the sense that they wanted to add smites somehow as a subclass feature and it just got really out of hand. Im going to have to reread the section just to figure out how summoning the thing out works with actually using it, and i still just have this strong disconnect of picturing how the whole thing would play out in my head.

[MeeposFire]

The dead levels are a hold over from casters not getting class features when they gain higher level spell slots. I think it's meant to emphasise the feel that, like Jaapleton pointed out, they're closer to a 2/3 caster than a 1/2 caster. I'm of the opinion, however, that the class feels lacking because of those gaps. It also doesn't at all justify the 7th and 11th level gaps where they don't even gain a higher level spell slot. The scaling feels off and I wouldn't be surprised to hear that a player felt that those levels were unrewarding.'

First impressions make me think that some of the empty levels could be used to allow subclass specific infusions. It's awfully convenient that 7th and 11th level both give you an additional infusion known.

It is similar to warlocks and their infusions. There are levels of warlock that seem dead unless you notice that they get an invocation.

I think it would look less dead if they spelled out that you get a new spell level, invocation, infusion, etc in the class level chart (I mean where the rest of the stuff is not in its own section like it is now). NOt actually needed but it would look less dead if that was added in.

[Tetrasodium]

The dead levels are a hold over from casters not getting class features when they gain higher level spell slots. I think it's meant to emphasise the feel that, like Jaapleton pointed out, they're closer to a 2/3 caster than a 1/2 caster. I'm of the opinion, however, that the class feels lacking because of those gaps. It also doesn't at all justify the 7th and 11th level gaps where they don't even gain a higher level spell slot. The scaling feels off and I wouldn't be surprised to hear that a player felt that those levels were unrewarding.'

First impressions make me think that some of the empty levels could be used to allow subclass specific infusions. It's awfully convenient that 7th and 11th level both give you an additional infusion known.

That's usually true with casters where they get a new spell level at dead levels; but artificer has them at 7 9 11 13 15 & 17 with only 9 13 & 17 giving access to new spell levels. Lets be honest though, getting third level spells at level 5 is impressive... getting one at level 9?... not so much. A wizard has 8 dead levels but of those gain spells of 2@3, 3@5, 4@7, 5@9, 6@11, 7@13, 8@15, 9@17. warlock have dead levels at 5 7 9 & 18.. on all of those dead levels from warlock gets extra invocations, & except for 18 also get either a bump in spell slots or spell slot level bump. Ranger & paladin both have only 3 dead levels at 9 13 & 17. Given the number of dead levels, earning one more infusion on three of those dead levels doesn't really work the same considering the too late to be impressive access to new spell level dead levels.

edit: @meposfire, as you can see it's not really like those warlock dead levels at all.

[Anderlith]

I love the new Battlesmith & the buffs to the Alchemist & Artillerist. I still think Artillerist is lacking damage & versatility. The Archivist is... really odd & cool but... odd. It kinda reminds me of a Brandon Sanderson thing. I can definitely see an Archivist reading books & summoning “minds” that are personas of books or heroes in stories. Maybe an intellect of a tome, or the warrior spirit of a sword.

[Personification]

I love the new Battlesmith & the buffs to the Alchemist & Artillerist. I still think Artillerist is lacking damage & versatility. The Archivist is... really odd & cool but... odd. It kinda reminds me of a Brandon Sanderson thing. I can definitely see an Archivist reading books & summoning “minds” that are personas of books or heroes in stories. Maybe an intellect of a tome, or the warrior spirit of a sword.

Which one? Spren?

[Damon_Tor]

Anyone else notice the new infusion let's you use a hand crossbow with a shield? The item still technically has the ammunition trait, but the fact that you need a free hand to reload it is meaningless if it simply autoloads itself.

[Talionis]

I’m not a super fan of artificer being the official pet class, but the Battle Smith does mechanically give me more variety in my Gish Brothers idea:
Four brothers, one an EK, one an AT, one a Hexblade, and now one a Battle Smith, each using a different stat for attacking, each using different spell casting, each with a different style of martial combat...
Totally agree that it’s weird that Artificer is the pet class. I like the idea that a subclass has pets but feel like it should basically be just one subclass of Artificier that gets pets.

I will disagree strongly that it’s bad that this class is a better beast master Ranger. The beast Master Ranger subclass already has a revision and is too underpowered so I am glad they are fixing the pet archetype.

[Anderlith]

Which one? Spren?

Spren, Seons, & “talking tools” in Mistborn. Any of the Cognative Realm denizens, really

[Anderlith]

Anyone else notice the new infusion let's you use a hand crossbow with a shield? The item still technically has the ammunition trait, but the fact that you need a free hand to reload it is meaningless if it simply autoloads itself.

I’m thinking of dual wielding hand crossbows, with buoyancy, doing John Woo action (Alchemist Hom, is a dove of course)

[Rukelnikov]

It seems overly complicated to divorce certain rules of spellcasting from their level 1 just because you don't think they should be casting level spells at 1st level. They either get spellcasting, and all that it entails at level 1, or they get it all at level 2. It's only going to confuse those who would be learning the game for the first time on why every other class has all of their spellcasting rules found in the same block but Artificers have a seperated one for some reason.

Why can't level 1 spellcasting be a unique feature for them as well? What does it hurt? Is it really a bad thing that someone actually decided not to dump Int for once and is able to multiclass into it?

True, it is complicated, I would just move spellcasting to lvl 2 and keep infusions at lvl 1. Its not only the different table but only at lvl 1, needing to modify the multiclass rules for spell slots seems an unnecesary complication too.

[Tectorman]

I noticed two issues that still appear to not be addressed.

One: the extra attunement slots could easily stand to be spread out and granted dooner (others have mentioned this already).

Two: the Artificer still doesn't have Use Magic Device, let alone at a level before the Thief Rogue.

Also, was there ever an option to provide feedback for the first Artificer for this year? I never saw it (cause I know I would have made sure to mention those two issues, at least).

[Anderlith]

I noticed two issues that still appear to not be addressed.

One: the extra attunement slots could easily stand to be spread out and granted dooner (others have mentioned this already).

Two: the Artificer still doesn't have Use Magic Device, let alone at a level before the Thief Rogue.

Also, was there ever an option to provide feedback for the first Artificer for this year? I never saw it (cause I know I would have made sure to mention those two issues, at least).

I don’t believe so. It went sidekicks, Artificer, radio silence, Artificer 2 Subclasses Boogaloo

[Kane0]

I noticed two issues that still appear to not be addressed.

One: the extra attunement slots could easily stand to be spread out and granted dooner (others have mentioned this already).

Two: the Artificer still doesn't have Use Magic Device, let alone at a level before the Thief Rogue.

Also, was there ever an option to provide feedback for the first Artificer for this year? I never saw it (cause I know I would have made sure to mention those two issues, at least).

Previously mentioned, and nothing that I remember. Hopefully these threads get read though, the last one was easily a dozen pages.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Previously mentioned, and nothing that I remember. Hopefully these threads get read though, the last one was easily a dozen pages.

I'm not aware of an official feedback avenue for the first iteration (there was a thread on DNDBeyond (https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/unearthed-arcana/31300-artificer-february-2019-ua-discussion) for feedback that is still ongoing) however JC has tweeted here (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1128385986134548480) that any further iterations will come after a survey.

[Ventruenox]

Anyone else notice the new infusion let's you use a hand crossbow with a shield?

Wildarm noticed this a little bit earlier. Given how multiclass grants shield proficiency, I foresee a number of Artificier dip builds. Shield + ranged weapon finally becomes a long overdue possibility.

Personally, I'm looking forward to creating a dissociative identity disorder Archivist build based upon whatever book was most recently read. It would certainly fix the "I wanna play a new character" compulsion many of us have during a campaign.

[Trustypeaches]

The Battlesmith seems like two strong subclasses smashed together.

It’s the martial subclass, the medic subclass, and the combat pet subclass all at once. It should just be two of those things, IMO.

Also they really should change Alchemist’s sixth level feature to either (A) include another damage type or (B) apply to potions and poisons made by the Alchemist as well (+INT to cheap healing potions would be nice).

[Kane0]

Alchemist (acid, poison, healing, alchemical utility)
Mechanist (pet, gadgets)
Battlesmith (weapons, armor)
Artillerist (wands, rods, staves)
Archivist (scrolls, psychic)

Even that I think is one or two subclasses too many to start with, i'd say refine and release with three then add the other two later in further UA or splat like Xans.

[Arkhios]

INT to attack and damge rolls? Please, no...

Strongly agreed.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Strongly agreed.

I'm still curious as to why this is seen as such a large sticking point. Compared to Hexblade, this takes more commitment and keys off what many would unashamedly (and probably correctly) label as the worst ability score in 5E.

Is the concern in multiclassing? Is the concern that this would become Hexblade 2.0 and detract from the core classes identity, labeling it as a "one(three) level wonder" class?

I'd really like to understand why some are seeing it as such a problem, I don't see it that way myself.

[MinimanMidget]

Personally, I think they don't need to create a situation where spellcasters get to be just as good at fighting as martial classes. Because you can bet they'll never create the reverse situation and let martial classes be as good at spellcasting as spellcasters.

That aside, everyone else has to invest in one stat to get better at spellcasting, and another stat to get better at fighting. Then you have hexblades (and now battlesmiths), who get better at fighting without investing in a second stat, so it's a giant middle finger to everyone who doesn't have that option.

On top of that, wholesale substitution of attack and damage with another stat is boring, lazy design, that makes for boring, lazy builds. In the pre hexblade world, paladins, valor bards, bladelocks, and so on all had to invest in 2 stats, and make decisions about their priorities. Features like lifedrinker or sacred weapon made those choices more interesting without removing them. Now they just dip hexblade and pump Charisma.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying bladelock didn't have problems. But the hexblade is massively overpowered compared to every other patron and its fluff is nonsensical. It was not a good fix. The battlesmith won't be nearly as problematic, but it's still annoying to see them doing this again.

[JackPhoenix]

Fun fact I noticed, as written you can't actually be an Archivist or Battle Smith:

Kind of lazy of them to just copy-paste the abilities from before without double-checking them.

I don't know what are you talking about. It clearly states "At 3rd level, you choose the type of specialist you are: Alchemist, Archivist, Artillerist, or Battle Smith, each of which is detailed at the end of the class’s description. Your choice grants you features at 3rd level and again at 6th and 14th level."

[Arkhios]

I'm still curious as to why this is seen as such a large sticking point. Compared to Hexblade, this takes more commitment and keys off what many would unashamedly (and probably correctly) label as the worst ability score in 5E.

Is the concern in multiclassing? Is the concern that this would become Hexblade 2.0 and detract from the core classes identity, labeling it as a "one(three) level wonder" class?

I'd really like to understand why some are seeing it as such a problem, I don't see it that way myself.

I suppose it just reminds me too much of 4th edition's idiocy in certain aspects of the game. If they keep Artificer's Intelligence as a possible substitution for attack and damage, how long it'll take until we get a class that uses Constitution for that instead (like they did with Battlemind in 4th edition; ridiculous idea and class, if you'd ask me).

I mean, you use your hand(s) to wield a weapon. It defies logic that a dude or dudette who can barely lift a sword would somehow be able to deal just as much damage with it as someone with Herculean strength just because they're very intelligent. Dexterity I can understand, somewhat. Though, even then it takes very specific type of weapons to make sense.

Hexblades are able to do the same with Charisma, but their choice of weapons is very limited.

Likewise, Shillelagh lets a druid (or someone with the cantrip) use Wisdom instead of strength when attacking with a club or quarterstaff. But that works only for 1 minute at a time.

Also, while Monks have more variety in weapons they can use with Dexterity, all of them make sense. And with Kensei, they have to choose individual weapons for that.

But Battle Smith? Oh, they can use Intelligence with ANY magic weapon they use. It doesn't matter if the weapon is normally mundane, because they could use an infusion to make that weapon magical for days at a time, and here we go again.

[Millstone85]

I don't know what are you talking about. It clearly states "At 3rd level, you choose the type of specialist you are: Alchemist, Archivist, Artillerist, or Battle Smith, each of which is detailed at the end of the class’s description. Your choice grants you features at 3rd level and again at 6th and 14th level."I had to erase my browsing history to get that correction.

[Constructman]

I don't know what are you talking about. It clearly states "At 3rd level, you choose the type of specialist you are: Alchemist, Archivist, Artillerist, or Battle Smith, each of which is detailed at the end of the class’s description. Your choice grants you features at 3rd level and again at 6th and 14th level."

They updated the doc. Before they did, that paragraph only had the old two subclasses, along with some other things that weren't caught by copyediting.

[Arkhios]

Is it just me, or does it feel strange that Artificer is, for some reason, entitled to "snowflake-ish" special rules for multiclass spellcasting, that are an exact opposite compared to other half-casters (or rather, all partial-level casters)?

RAW, Paladin, Ranger, Arcane Trickster, and Eldritch Knight all round their levels down. But Artificer? Round'em up. It just doesn't seem to add up. Why is it? Just because they absolutely must get spells at 1st level? Why wouldn't Cantrips be enough for first level?

As a side-note, would it actually hurt anything if the older classes would get this same treatment? In fact, what if they're already considering to change it so, and are playtesting it with Artificer?

[ProsecutorGodot]

SNIP

I suppose this is just going to be a difference in opinion then. I agree that from a certain viewpoint it can look off, rationalizing the intelligence attacker as being "smart enough to make his weapon hit harder" compared to physical strength definitely fits that angle.

The issue is that it really doesn't have to be that way, and in my opinion it doesn't do a whole lot of good to treat it that way. If we wanted to treat the game as realistic as possible, Dexterity really shouldn't be used for attacking in most cases either. Outside of weapons designed with precision or finesse (pun not intended) in mind you would expect strength to be the decider in how effective your damage is. Bows and Crossbows especially don't make any sense (I recall a thread bringing this up) and as someone who has taken at least two archery classes in my life I can tell you that it takes a lot of brute strength to draw a bow that hasn't been drastically modified. An 8 str Fighter with X-Bow expert it able to load and fire up to 4 bolts in a matter of seconds, that's an absurd amount of strength in a short span of time.

From the gameplay perspective, I don't see as many problems with this as I would the Hexblade. Infusions take a long rest to place, if you put one of these Artificers in a scenario where they were disarmed and had to escape quickly they'd be forced to use spells to escape rather than simply calling their weapon back as a Hexblade can.

Artificers are pegged as the guys who can draw the magic in things to their practical limits, I wouldn't think it out of the ordinary if they knew how to actively propel the magic in an item to do more. Their Arcane Armament feature is meant to emulate just that and Battle Smith is the guy who does that better than the rest.

It's at least not any stranger than a Dancing Sword using your Str mod to swing itself.

[Arkhios]

I suppose this is just going to be a difference in opinion then. I agree that from a certain viewpoint it can look off, rationalizing the intelligence attacker as being "smart enough to make his weapon hit harder" compared to physical strength definitely fits that angle.

The issue is that it really doesn't have to be that way, and in my opinion it doesn't do a whole lot of good to treat it that way. If we wanted to treat the game as realistic as possible, Dexterity really shouldn't be used for attacking in most cases either. Outside of weapons designed with precision or finesse (pun not intended) in mind you would expect strength to be the decider in how effective your damage is. Bows and Crossbows especially don't make any sense (I recall a thread bringing this up) and as someone who has taken at least two archery classes in my life I can tell you that it takes a lot of brute strength to draw a bow that hasn't been drastically modified. An 8 str Fighter with X-Bow expert it able to load and fire up to 4 bolts in a matter of seconds, that's an absurd amount of strength in a short span of time.

From the gameplay perspective, I don't see as many problems with this as I would the Hexblade. Infusions take a long rest to place, if you put one of these Artificers in a scenario where they were disarmed and had to escape quickly they'd be forced to use spells to escape rather than simply calling their weapon back as a Hexblade can.

Artificers are pegged as the guys who can draw the magic in things to their practical limits, I wouldn't think it out of the ordinary if they knew how to actively propel the magic in an item to do more. Their Arcane Armament feature is meant to emulate just that and Battle Smith is the guy who does that better than the rest.

It's at least not any stranger than a Dancing Sword using your Str mod to swing itself.

Hmm. When you put it that way, it does make a fair deal of sense, after all. I admit I made an oversight there. It's true that the exemplars of magical item creation could indeed draw a little bit of extra juice out of magic items, so much so to make attacks using wits instead of brawn. If anything, I think Artificer seems like the best choice to do that, actually.

[Tetrasodium]

@arkhios: the oddness you note with casting is because they are trying to take a 2/3 caster class and squish it into a half caster mold rather than just do 2/3 caster


I suppose it just reminds me too much of 4th edition's idiocy in certain aspects of the game. If they keep Artificer's Intelligence as a possible substitution for attack and damage, how long it'll take until we get a class that uses Constitution for that instead (

Speak if the devil... Funny you should mention that. Artificer is a class from eberron. On the subject of a con based class... Aberrant dragonmarks already key off con to represent the strain they put on the aberrant individual trying to harness their mark. It's not outside the realm of reasonable that there might be an aberrant class considering that true marks used to have several classes. Relax :D as long as they don't try to do like the bad old "artificer" Lantan/Ravinica versions it will be fine.

[Arkhios]

@arkhios: the oddness you note with casting is because they are trying to take a 2/3 caster class and squish it into a half caster mold rather than just do 2/3 caster

Personally, I would prefer that if they use an existing chassis for a new class, they should follow same base rules that are implied with similar classes. Theoretically, I wouldn't mind if they introduced an entirely new spellcasting progression, but practically, if they were to introduce an actual 2/3 progression, it might get very messy.


Speak if the devil... Funny you should mention that. Artificer is a class from eberron. On the subject of a con based class... Aberrant dragonmarks already key off con to represent the strain they put on the aberrant individual trying to harness their mark. It's not outside the realm of reasonable that there might be an aberrant class considering that true marks used to have several classes. Relax :D as long as they don't try to do like the bad old "artificer" Lantan/Ravinica versions it will be fine.

For the record, I've been playing D&D for little over 17 years, and I know that Artificer is a class from Eberron, which originated in 3.5.
I don't think it's bad if some "spell-like abilities" (again, I'm aware it's not a term that's in use in 5th edition, it just feels appropriate in this regard) key off from Constitution. What I do consider bad design is to actually let someone make a weapon attack using Constitution for both attack and damage rolls. Not only because of potentially implied incentive to do cheesy builds.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Speak if the devil... Funny you should mention that. Artificer is a class from eberron. On the subject of a con based class... Aberrant dragonmarks already key off con to represent the strain they put on the aberrant individual trying to harness their mark. It's not outside the realm of reasonable that there might be an aberrant class considering that true marks used to have several classes. Relax :D as long as they don't try to do like the bad old "artificer" Lantan/Ravinica versions it will be fine.

Morgrave Miscellany (unofficial add-on to WGtE, also written by Keith Baker) has Children of Khyber as a race option. The Aberrant Dragonmark is more of a feat chain (Lesser, Normal, Greater, Khyber) than a class with how it's listed, but it does give you limited spellcasting all the way up to 6th level.

It would take some effort but I think you could take a Fighter or Rogue and play them with some degree of success using primarily the spells/abilities gained from these feats.

[Kane0]

But they get zero abilities to manipulate the charges or power of magic items oddly enough.

[ProsecutorGodot]

But they get zero abilities to manipulate the charges or power of magic items oddly enough.

I'd say that Battle Smith's ability to use Int when attacking with magical weapons is a bit of manipulation (that's a stretch, I know) but I can't argue against the fact that they're missing a lot of basic things in terms of being masters of magical items.

For the sake of argument, do you think a distinction should be made in the ability to augment their own creations vs someone elses? This is pretty much the only reason I could think of that they would be lacking the ability to tinker with magical items that they didn't create, with their ability to create them being the extent to which they can push the boundary outside of their subclass specific creations.

[Damon_Tor]

I’m not a super fan of artificer being the official pet class, but the Battle Smith does mechanically give me more variety in my Gish Brothers idea:
Four brothers, one an EK, one an AT, one a Hexblade, and now one a Battle Smith, each using a different stat for attacking, each using different spell casting, each with a different style of martial combat...

You've got to figure out adding someone with shillelagh too.

[Arkhios]

You've got to figure out adding someone with shillelagh too.

Ranger with Magic Initiate (Druid): Magic Stone, Shillelagh, and maybe Goodberry. Could even take Archery style, and use the sling to "shoot" those magic stones. With Wisdom.

[Wildarm]

Wildarm noticed this a little bit earlier. Given how multiclass grants shield proficiency, I foresee a number of Artificier dip builds. Shield + ranged weapon finally becomes a long overdue possibility.

Personally, I'm looking forward to creating a dissociative identity disorder Archivist build based upon whatever book was most recently read. It would certainly fix the "I wanna play a new character" compulsion many of us have during a campaign.

Yeah the more I've been thinking on this build, the more I see a 2-3 Level Artificer dip being fantastic for a Ranged build in pretty much every way. It gives some utility, a +1 weapon without the loading property and +1d6 Acid damage to all your attacks.

Trying to come up with a Bladesinger/Battle Smith Build concept but it doesn't mesh all that well together. Can't use a shield or medium/heavy armor and you end up having to invest in Dex anyway.

Looking more to melee compared to ranged, I thought a Fighter 1/Battle Smith Artificer 5 is also very solid tank. Go full Metal:

Forest Gnome
Sword and Board - Str 8, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 18, Wis 12, Cha 8
Wear Heavy Armor and Ride your Iron Defender(AC15, 31 HP) with 40' Speed
You should have +1 Plate, Shield @ Level 4 - AC 21
Iron Defender can impose disadvantage on an attack against you as a reaction

Damage Output:

Longsword: 2x 1d8+4(Int)+1d6 Acid(Arcane Weapon)
Bonus Action Iron Defender Attack: 1d8+3
Overal DPS - 28 per round assuming all hit

You're tough to hurt and do enough damage to keep some attention on you. Plus the normal Artificer half caster spell progression. I expect your defender will get attacked as a priority but it can heal itself 6d8+9 HP per day and you can just spend a spell slot to rebuild it if it dies. That is crazy efficient.

Trying to think of a good combo for warding bond but nothing really comes to mind for this build except for perhaps Heavy Armor Master.

Other thoughts:

Battle Smith also builds magic armor cheaply. If you're DM allows you time to craft stuff, you could forgo the fighter level and just wear medium armor and eventually craft +1 Mithral Half Plate and a +1 Shield. Potentially craft some +1 mithral plate barding for your Iron Guardian as well to get it's AC up to 19.

New UA opens up quite a few strong and interesting builds. Have to give more though to Archivist. Seems so odd....

[OvisCaedo]

Well, there's a lot of... interesting stuff here, at least. Real weird stuff. I guess I like it, though a few things seem just strange to me.

...Like, why add an "enhanced wand" infusion instead of just putting wand of the war mage on the replicable items table? It seems to be completely identical. It scales up at 12, which is also where the higher batch of item replications show up and the +2 could be put. Maybe they just want to avoid putting redundant + items on the table, I guess...?

also still feels like the capstone is pretty sudden, and the lack of a UMD equivalent still feels odd. I guess it's not STRICTLY necessary, though, since it seems a lot of more generic wands and staves just say "spellcaster" as their attunement requirement.

(and a slight correction to the previous poster, repulsion shield seems to require 8th level, don't think you'll be getting that one at level 4. Not a big deal though. Possibly even for the best, since you might really want to have a permanently magic weapon instead of complete reliance on arcane weapon uptime for your attack stat)

[Misterwhisper]

I am more intrigued by a few of the infusions than I am the class itself.

The idea of an infusion that makes a magical auto-loading ranged weapon i love the idea of as it opens the door for having a normal magic item like that.
Same with the basic returning property.

[Rukelnikov]

Yeah the more I've been thinking on this build, the more I see a 2-3 Level Artificer dip being fantastic for a Ranged build in pretty much every way. It gives some utility, a +1 weapon without the loading property and +1d6 Acid damage to all your attacks.

Trying to come up with a Bladesinger/Battle Smith Build concept but it doesn't mesh all that well together. Can't use a shield or medium/heavy armor and you end up having to invest in Dex anyway.

Looking more to melee compared to ranged, I thought a Fighter 1/Battle Smith Artificer 5 is also very solid tank. Go full Metal:

Forest Gnome
Sword and Board - Str 8, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 18, Wis 12, Cha 8
Wear Heavy Armor and Ride your Iron Defender(AC15, 31 HP) with 40' Speed
You should have +1 Plate, +1 Repulsion Shield @ Level 4 - AC 22
Iron Defender can impose disadvantage on an attack against you as a reaction

Damage Output:

Longsword: 2x 1d8+4(Int)+1d6 Acid(Arcane Weapon)
Bonus Action Iron Defender Attack: 1d8+3
Overal DPS - 28 per round assuming all hit

Bladesinger was the first thing I thought of too, but since they have to wear light armor you end up needing to max the two stats anyway and Int to att/dam becomes not as relevant, ended up thinking a build pretty similar to yours, ride panther and maybe get BB/GFB to ready attack with it when you ride by an enemy. The class really seems custom made for Gnomes(Rock in particular), and its fitting after all, bonus to Int, medium size pet (only smalls can ride it), and Artificer's Lore + Tinker.

Other interesting builds can be:

Art2/BattleMasterX - Plate + Shield + Hand Xbow, Arcane Weapon, plus nice versatility from low lvl spells

BS3/ArcaneArcherX - Full SAD, Improving Att/Dam also improves your saves DC, magic arms and archery style, Arcane Weapon.

BS3-5/ArcaneTricksterX - You are good with +2 Dex, your pet can soak some damage and grants you an ally for Sneak Attak, gain great versatility for spellcasting, and you only really need to pump Int.

[Tetrasodium]

I think that the concerns people are raising over it becoming another scorlockadin type abomination are drastically overblown & ignore the fact that sorc/warlock are both very frontloaded classes that have their archtype split at first level and have significant additive/multiplicative synergies. The artificer is anything but front loaded by comparison & splits into archtypes at third. Yes artificer enables some cool new multiclass options & some of them could work well together, but three levels is a huge investment & none of the other classes bring anything like pact magic+flexible casting+repelling agonizing eldritch blast+devils sight or any other scorlock WotCFailedSanityChecking combos.

[jaappleton]

While I was excited about February's UA, showing us the new Artificer, the subclasses really didn't excite me at all.

These two new subclasses greatly excite me. I know I have a bit of a rep as an optimizer, but the new Swordma- Sorry, Battle Smith, doesn't even do that much for me, either. Its cool, its unique and certainly strong.

But I'm loving the Archivist. The idea of having a floating book next to me shooting psychic damage at people as I shout, "KNOWLEDGE IS POWER!" is amazing to me.

[Wildarm]

(and a slight correction to the previous poster, repulsion shield seems to require 8th level, don't think you'll be getting that one at level 4. Not a big deal though. Possibly even for the best, since you might really want to have a permanently magic weapon instead of complete reliance on arcane weapon uptime for your attack stat)

Good catch. Yeah, no way to have magic plate and a magic shield at level 4(can't use same infusion on 2 items). You'll get to upgrade to a +1 Repulsion shield at level 8 and +2 plate at level 12. Your AC will keep scaling for a while with little cost which is great.

Thinking more on builds. Perhaps Abjurer 2/Battle Smith X would be a good combo for a mounted gish? Access to more cantrips(Artificer really needs this), more spell slots, rituals and shield spell, 6-7 HP Ward.

Possible Combos:
- Warding Bond on Iron Guardian - Damage to either of you gets taken off your ward and it gets a boost to AC and saves. Recharges Ward.
- Sanctuary on Iron Guardian while it repairs itself - Encourages foes not to attack it. Recharges ward, Bonus action use conflict. Not ideal.
- Aid on yourself and Iron Guardian - Increases HP for both of you and recharges ward

Other ideas:

I don't think you really need intelligence necessarily as a ranged Battle Smith. You have VERY limited prepared known till level 12 though. Still your list of choices can pretty limited anyway - Arcane Weapon, Absorb Elements, Aid, Blur, Haste gives you enough to work with your limited slots till then. Rest of your spells will likely go to rebuilding your mount as needed.

Metal Dragon Musketeer
Battle Smith X
Kobold - Str 8, Dex 16, Con 15, Int 8, Wis 15, Cha 8
ASI - Sharpshooter @ Level 4, +1Wis/Con Level 8,
Iron Guardian - Robotic Ambush Drake

Infusions:
+1 Repeating Musket (If DM approves firearm use for Artificer)
+1 Half Plate (AC 18)
+2 Half Plate and Headband of Intellect @ Level 12
Maybe Goggles of Daylight(Ask your DM to reskin Goggles of Night to remove sunlight sensitivity for Kobold)

Kobold Pack Tactics will let you make good use of sharpshooter even with a below average attack bonus. Your main attack with be:

2x - 1d12+1(+1 Musket) + 1d6(Arcane Weapon) +3(Dex) + 10(Sharpshooter) = Avg 24 damage a shot

If an enemy gets in your face you can still fire your musket - Pack Tactics with mount cancels disadvantage from ranged weapon in melee. Use your bonus action to command your mount to take the disengage action and move 40' away. You'll be a very mobile ranged attacker. Difficult to pin down until they kill your mount which has something like 75% of your own HP and possibly decent AC if you make it some magic barding.

[Wildarm]

While I was excited about February's UA, showing us the new Artificer, the subclasses really didn't excite me at all.

These two new subclasses greatly excite me. I know I have a bit of a rep as an optimizer, but the new Swordma- Sorry, Battle Smith, doesn't even do that much for me, either. Its cool, its unique and certainly strong.

But I'm loving the Archivist. The idea of having a floating book next to me shooting psychic damage at people as I shout, "KNOWLEDGE IS POWER!" is amazing to me.

My take on the Archivist so far:

- Scribe Scrolls cheaply. Due to the crazy wealth at higher levels this can lead to some interesting possibilities: 4x 1st level spells per day - 12.5gp per scroll. Great spells to be able to spam cheaply: False Life, Fairie Fire, Sanctuary, Cure Wounds, Longstrider, Arcane Weapon, Dissonant Whispers, Expeditious Retreat. Dip Cleric for even more spell choices like Healing Word, Shield of Faith, Protection from Good and Evil or Bless

- Many-Handed Pouch + Mind Network(Level 6) - Everyone has access to your scroll stash and can telepathically communicate with you. As an action, you can teleport to one of these pouches at level 14. Remember there is no range on this so you can teleport up to 100 miles away! Possibly teleport anywhere you leave 1 pouch. Wording on Many Handed Pouch seems to imply the pouch remains an infused item beyond 100 miles. It just can't hold anything. Leave a pouch in your base and teleport to it as an action with things get bad. Step on a bunch of prepped spell glyphs(Healing, Greater Restoration, Buffs, etc). Action(and 2nd level spell) to teleport back to your allies who hold the other pouches.

- Int Save targetting Cantrip with scaling 1d8 damage, potent cantrip for it @ level 6 AND gives advantage to the next attack on the foe AND you can smite! Very strong! Some bonus action tax to move the artificial mind around but that's OK. You don't have that many things to do with your bonus action.

- Pseudo darkvision - Requires your concentration but you can see through your artificial mind and it has 60' darkvision.

- Perception/Insight Proficiency - Useful, could see a very strong Knowledge Cleric 1/Archivist X skill/tool monkey.

- Mind Overload - I've always wanted to build a Paladin/Monk - Guess I can now? SAD + Ranged Smiting and Stunning Fist. Crazy... Actually makes pure Artificer very appealing. A very strong subclass capstone without the teleport ability.

[GlenSmash!]

Alright so a Battlesmith can wreck face equally with a Greatsword and Longbow using the power of his intellect.

I'm flipping in.

[Wildarm]

Alright so a Battlesmith can wreck face equally with a Greatsword and Longbow using the power of his intellect.

I'm flipping in.

Has to be a magic weapon but yes. No different than a hexblade using the strength of his personality to attack with a greatsword or longbow. You have to wait till 3rd level compared to 1st for the Hexblade. So, nothing broken with it IMO. The funny thing is at level 12, the artificer can give himself 19 in his primary stat.

[GlenSmash!]

Has to be a magic weapon but yes. No different than a hexblade using the strength of his personality to attack with a greatsword or longbow. You have to wait till 3rd level compared to 1st for the Hexblade. So, nothing broken with it IMO. The funny thing is at level 12, the artificer can give himself 19 in his primary stat.

Yup, combined with making any mundane weapon magic it's really viable.

I hate playing Charisma based characters.

I also hate playing pet classes but you can always get what you want.

Going dwarf with a level of fighter would make it truly SAD, but I'd probably stick with something with and Int bonus,14 Dex, and Medium armor.

[Anderlith]

What subclass & background would you recommend for a character that grew up in a small town & went to war as an Artificer to get a chance to learn magic/artifice like he always wanted but could never afford Wizard school?

[Wildarm]

OK have some builds for Archivist:

Master of the Mind
Vedlaken(Or Gnome) Knowledge Cleric 1/Archivist X
Str 8, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 16, Wis 16, Cha 8
ASI: +2 Int, +2 Int, Observant, Res(Wis)
Skills - Expertise: Arcana, Nature, History(Magic Items), 5-7 Tools
Proficiency: Perception, Insight, Investigation, History, + Background (Stealth + ?)
Advantage on Int/Wis/Cha saves vs Magic
Start Archivist for Con proficiency

- You'll be a master of the mind with vast knowledge resources available.
- Stupidly high passive perception and investigation means nothing goes unnoticed.
- A strong control cantrip that targets the weakest save and you can burn spell slots to nova. Being able to stun with low level slots is also nice.
- Very decent AC that scales every 4 levels or so.
- Could go lower on Wisdom and higher on Con if you needed more toughness. Aid will also help.
- Lacking Dex save proficiency but you have access to absorb elements which is fantastic.
- Use the nature expertise to extract poisons from enemies. Keep them in your pouch for anyone to apply when needed. Potentially catapult contact poison at something.

Overall seems very solid.

Ranged Mental Smite Machine
Gnome Archivist 3/War Wizard X

- Con Saves
- +1 Half Plate, Shield and Arcane Deflection gives you an effective 22 AC at level 5
- Only lose 1 level of spell slot progression
- Still get 9th level spells
- In theory could hit for 4d8+10d8 damage though you'd never burn your 9th level slot on this.

I don't think this is particularly strong DPS wise compared to the equivalent wizard spells. You can't spam multiple smites in a turn to nova like a Padlock can. Closes comparison would be 8d8 with a 3rd level slot compared to 8d6 against multiple targets with fireball. Or 12d8(54 int save for none) with a 7th level slot vs 10d6+40(75 dex save for none) with disintegrate. And you don't waste the spell slot if you miss with the cantrip.

I'd honestly play it like a utility wizard:

- Not getting 3rd level spells till level 8 will be painful
- Lots of versatility between your cantrips, infusions, healing, rituals, skills and tools
- You can scribe scrolls cheaply for extra resources and rarely used spells
- You have a very good AC and saves
- A strong control cantrip that you can easily boost the damage. This is efficient damage as if they fail the INT save, then you burn the smite slot to pile on some damage.
- 1-3 extra spells you can prepare compared to pure wizard due to Int double dipping. Cure wounds, Expeditious Retreat and Absorb Elements would be good choices.

[Man_Over_Game]

What subclass & background would you recommend for a character that grew up in a small town & went to war as an Artificer to get a chance to learn magic/artifice like he always wanted but could never afford Wizard school?

Soldier Artillerist or Battle Smith. That'd directly fit what I'd expect an army would turn an Artificer into.

Artillerist as a specialist who they wanted to keep in the back lines, likely as part of some kind of engineering organization. A good choice, if you were smart.

Battle Smith is if you were a Soldier first and an Artificer second. You were "cross trained" as a front line soldier, and they happened to train you in magical engineering when you didn't die in the first couple skirmishes. A good choice, if you were stupid.

I could also see some support as an Alchemist, but I think an army would be recruiting those, not training them. If they wanted a medic, they'd just teach 10x as many Fighter/Thieves to learn the Healer feat, rather than training a mad scientist how to regenerate organs with magic.

[Misterwhisper]

I would never play this class because it is OP garbage but I am not above making an NPC with it for a game I am running.

There is no reason to, but I could make a dual wielding "gunslinger" with hand crossbows.

Or

Just one HCB that the NPC "fans" when he uses his bonus action attack from CBE or uses extra attack.

[jaappleton]

What subclass & background would you recommend for a character that grew up in a small town & went to war as an Artificer to get a chance to learn magic/artifice like he always wanted but could never afford Wizard school?

Folk Hero?

[Tetrasodium]

What subclass & background would you recommend for a character that grew up in a small town & went to war as an Artificer to get a chance to learn magic/artifice like he always wanted but could never afford Wizard school?

Auditor, cadet, & chronicler all look like good fits. really any background could work depending on how you want to spin it. morgraves misc has a section on eberronizing the rather faerun slanted phb backgrounds too :D

[jaappleton]

I would never play this class because it is OP garbage but I am not above making an NPC with it for a game I am running.

There is no reason to, but I could make a dual wielding "gunslinger" with hand crossbows.

Or

Just one HCB that the NPC "fans" when he uses his bonus action attack from CBE or uses extra attack.

Yeah dude. We get it. Its like the 4th post in this topic you've made that you don't like it.

Gonna add anything constructive?

[Misterwhisper]

Yeah dude. We get it. Its like the 4th post in this topic you've made that you don't like it.

Gonna add anything constructive?

1. I have only posted 3 times at all on this thread.

2. One of those was talking about how I actually liked the infusions.

3. Maybe you should try being constructive as well instead of whining about other people's critiques of a UA.

[Daphne]

Maybe you should try being constructive as well instead of whining about other people's critiques of a UA.

Calling it garbage isn't a critique.

[Misterwhisper]

Calling it garbage isn't a critique.

Yes, actually, it is.

If someone puts out a product, even if that product is free, does not give them blanket immunity from negative responses about its quality.

[Anderlith]

Auditor, cadet, & chronicler all look like good fits. really any background could work depending on how you want to spin it. morgraves misc has a section on eberronizing the rather faerun slanted phb backgrounds too :D

I don’t have Morgrave Misc, I don’t know what any of those do

[Wildarm]

Another interesting thing about the Archivist is you can cast an artificer spell as though you were in the manifested artificial minds(MAM) space. Few ideas:

- Ranged Cure Wounds, Restoration or Revivify is nice.
- Subtle portable guidance perhaps if it hides inside something another player carries. Maybe useful for social interaction or boosting the scout moving ahead of the party.
- Flexible Thorn Whip movement. You can actually pull foes away or laterally now.
- +300' Range to spells like Heat Metal(!), Detect Thoughts, Vitriolic Sphere, Hypnotic Pattern, Otiluke’s resilient sphere, Animate Objects, Bigby's Hand

Provided your MAM can move unobstructed into an area you can be VERY far away. You get to use the senses of your MAM to cast the spell and you don't lose concentration when you don't have line of sight. You can cast a concentration spell and keep it maintained. Limited to Int Mod times per day but potentially encounter breaking.

Jeez, the more I think of this, the more I see Heat Metal with a 360' range that doesn't require LOS to be pretty broken at level 5. Your tiny MAM is invulnerable and can drift on onto an enemy up to 300' away and cast heat metal on it. He glows dim light for 10' so it may raise alarms but I don't think anyone is going to run from Caerbannog, a fluffy floating spectral bunny. Caster is nicely hidden away somewhere and just burns for the full minute then resumes concentration on his MAM senses to see if he managed to melt the BBEG into a pile of slag and barbecued flesh.

I think the Archivist actually would make a really good assassin. You can change your manifested minds appearance pretty easily. So easy to have it manifest as something related to who you want to blame for an attack and have it go assassinate someone. Even at level 3 you can drift the MAM in and catapult items at people to kill them.

[Spiritchaser]

There’s a pretty cool Gish available in battle smith

I’m not a huge fan of the fluff, but it looks like it’d be fun

Either add war wizard for saves and shadow blade (it’s a magic weapon) or go GWM with a big freaking glaive. Looks pretty cool really. Robokitty for bonus actions plus good utility

I’m aware of fears that this is OP, but I don’t see anywhere it would outperform a solid mix of warlock paladin and or sorcerer.

[jaappleton]

There’s a pretty cool Gish available in battle smith

I’m not a huge fan of the fluff, but it looks like it’d be fun

Either add war wizard for saves and shadow blade (it’s a magic weapon) or go GWM with a big freaking glaive. Looks pretty cool really. Robokitty for bonus actions plus good utility

I’m aware of fears that this is OP, but I don’t see anywhere it would outperform a solid mix of warlock paladin and or sorcerer.

Everyone complaining that using Int for weapons is OP, remember this takes 3 levels of investment. THREE. That's literally 3X as much investment as it does for anyone dipping Hexblade. And there's only ONE other full class which keys off Intelligence, the Wizard, and a grand total of just four other non-Wizard subclasses in the game which key off Intelligence: Arcane Archer, EK, Arcane Trickster and Mastermind Rogue. Only two of which are spellcasters, and even then, only 1/3rd casters.

As opposed to the synergy that all the Charisma focused classes have.

And lets not forget anyone Wisdom focused can steal everyones favorite Druid cantrip and key off Wisdom for melee attacks.

Everyone complaining about Int for attacks needs to calm the hell down.

[JackPhoenix]

I don’t have Morgrave Misc, I don’t know what any of those do

You aren't missing much.

Soldier sounds most fitting, IMO.

[Spiritchaser]

Everyone complaining about Int for attacks needs to calm the hell down.

Not having played this, that’s very much my first response as well.

I would add one caution that there might be a few particularly STRONG synergies, that might be a problem, perhaps with war wizard or abjurer, but on the whole I still don’t immediately see these doing things I can’t already do with CHA classes.

Different?

Sure.

Better? Meh...

[jaappleton]

Not having played this, that’s very much my first response as well.

I would add one caution that there might be a few particularly STRONG synergies, that might be a problem, perhaps with war wizard or abjurer, but on the whole I still don’t immediately see these doing things I can’t already do with CHA classes.

Different?

Sure.

Better? Meh...

Sure there will be some strong synergies. But hardly anything game-breaking.

Any before anyone says, "But a lv17 Bladesinger with three levels of Artificer can-" STOP. You're talking about a level 20 character. Here's a hint: EVERYTHING AT THAT LEVEL IS PRETTY GAME-BREAKING. You have the ****ing Wish spell at that level, that's the end of the discussion.

Really, what everyone is missing is that Cure Wounds can now key off Intelligence. Which is rad. "Oh but Wizards can already do so much-" You really gonna complain about someone else being able to heal your butt? You gonna voice those complaints when you're at 3 hit points? No. Shut up and take the healing.

[Man_Over_Game]

Sure there will be some strong synergies. But hardly anything game-breaking.

Any before anyone says, "But a lv17 Bladesinger with three levels of Artificer can-" STOP. You're talking about a level 20 character. Here's a hint: EVERYTHING AT THAT LEVEL IS PRETTY GAME-BREAKING. You have the ****ing Wish spell at that level, that's the end of the discussion.

Really, what everyone is missing is that Cure Wounds can now key off Intelligence. Which is rad. "Oh but Wizards can already do so much-" You really gonna complain about someone else being able to heal your butt? You gonna voice those complaints when you're at 3 hit points? No. Shut up and take the healing.

An interesting point that I've seen in 5e is that, as long as you aren't taking the spotlight, you can basically do as much as you want.

Take a look at Clerics. They buff. They deal damage. They can hit things. They have a range of proficiencies. They're a full caster. They have their own smite effect that doesn't cost a resource. They do so much. The reason they're allowed to is because their spell lists are terrible at being selfish. Almost everything they do in terms of spells is about helping others succeed. Compare that to a Sorcerer, and you'll see the trend I'm talking about.

[Spiritchaser]

Actually what I think is of special interest is that the artificer can make a headband of intellect

If you can handle the path to level 12 with int 16, you can boost it to 19 with no ASIs

This could lead to a LOT of feats, or Very high CON.

[Spiritchaser]

An interesting point that I've seen in 5e is that, as long as you aren't taking the spotlight, you can basically do as much as you want.

Take a look at Clerics. They buff. They deal damage. They can hit things. They have a range of proficiencies. They're a full caster. They have their own smite effect that doesn't cost a resource. They do so much. The reason they're allowed to is because their spell lists are terrible at being selfish. Almost everything they do in terms of spells is about helping others succeed. Compare that to a Sorcerer, and you'll see the trend I'm talking about.

I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of it but years ago (and kind of now again) there was a MMO game called city of heroes.

It subscribed to the same philosophy.

A party of buffers, all buffing each other and debuffing the enemy could be absurdly powerful.

[Wildarm]

Not having played this, that’s very much my first response as well.

I would add one caution that there might be a few particularly STRONG synergies, that might be a problem, perhaps with war wizard or abjurer, but on the whole I still don’t immediately see these doing things I can’t already do with CHA classes.

Different?

Sure.

Better? Meh...

The Int to attacks/damage is not broken by any means. Losing an ASI, 3 levels of spell progression levels and 1 level of spell slot progression is pretty hard to justify to be a SAD character. What Battle Smith does give you is a solid companion/mount and effectively a bonus action attack. A wizard doesn't care all that much about it. It's a nice multi-class for an Eldritch Knight or Arcane Archer perhaps. Personally, I'd go all in on Battle Smith and not bother multi-classing out to other things. The level 20 capstone is crazy good if you're aiming to be a tank. I think you can guaranteed have the following: +2 Half Plate, +1 Repelling Shield(Attunement), Cloak of Protection(Attunement), Ring of Protection(Attunement), Amulet of Health(Attunement) + 2 other Attuned Non-Infusion Items: +8 to all saves, 24AC, 183HP+20HP(Upcast Aid) . Your Iron Guardian will have 15AC and 107HP+20HP(Upcast Aid).

Assuming you could attune to a staff of power you're getting +10 to saves and 26 AC. You'll have lots of spare ASI. Grab Toughness and boost your HP up to 243. +3 Shield or +3 Plate would also add more AC if you find them. Even more fun, find a Shield Guardian and have him guarding you as well. Have him cast haste on you and maintain concentration on it. You're not quite invulnerable but it will take ALOT to get you out of the fight. Unfortunately you're not doing that much more damage at level 20 than you did at level 5. Animate Objects on a bunch of +1 admantine daggers might be your best bet. You've got something like +20 to Con saves to maintain concentration. Perhaps with advantage if you took warcaster.

[GlenSmash!]

What subclass & background would you recommend for a character that grew up in a small town & went to war as an Artificer to get a chance to learn magic/artifice like he always wanted but could never afford Wizard school?

Soldier or Folk Hero both would work very well.


Yes, actually, it is.

If someone puts out a product, even if that product is free, does not give them blanket immunity from negative responses about its quality.

It's a critique but not a constructive one. Side by side comparisons with say Hexblade or Moon Druid, which are the most OP classes I can think of of the top of my head would be more helpful. I already have a few things I'll suggest in WotC's survey on this to tone it down some, and I'd love to hear yours too.

Anyway UA has always gone with a balls to the wall then dial it back approach.


Actually what I think is of special interest is that the artificer can make a headband of intellect

If you can handle the path to level 12 with int 16, you can boost it to 19 with no ASIs

This could lead to a LOT of feats, or Very high CON.

That's pretty neat.


Everyone complaining that using Int for weapons is OP, remember this takes 3 levels of investment. THREE. That's literally 3X as much investment as it does for anyone dipping Hexblade. And there's only ONE other full class which keys off Intelligence, the Wizard, and a grand total of just four other non-Wizard subclasses in the game which key off Intelligence: Arcane Archer, EK, Arcane Trickster and Mastermind Rogue. Only two of which are spellcasters, and even then, only 1/3rd casters.

As opposed to the synergy that all the Charisma focused classes have.

And lets not forget anyone Wisdom focused can steal everyones favorite Druid cantrip and key off Wisdom for melee attacks.

Everyone complaining about Int for attacks needs to calm the hell down.

Yup. I struggling to see how attacking with Int on a halfcaster is more OP than attacking Cha (for double damage I think) on a fullcaster.

[detro]

The Battlesmith seems like two strong subclasses smashed together.

It’s the martial subclass, the medic subclass, and the combat pet subclass all at once. It should just be two of those things, IMO.

Also they really should change Alchemist’s sixth level feature to either (A) include another damage type or (B) apply to potions and poisons made by the Alchemist as well (+INT to cheap healing potions would be nice).

Agreed.
Battlesmith is way too strong.
Archivist is also pretty strong. It's basically a chain warlock without having to deal with the crippling weaknesses of being a warlock.

[Man_Over_Game]

Yup. I struggling to see how attacking with Int on a halfcaster is more OP than attacking Cha (for double damage I think) on a fullcaster.

The concerns are probably related to defense.

With Bladesinger, you can afford to focus strictly on Intelligence, allowing you to rock a crazy high AC for minimal cost.

With Eldritch Knight, you can afford to focus on Intelligence and keep Strength as your secondary. Strength is more efficient, in terms of both gold cost and stats, at lower values when it comes to determining AC. It's a better secondary/tertiary stat than Dexterity, hands down.

Note that with the Hexblade or Monk Shillelagh builds, nothing that they gain from having a mental attack stat will actually improve their survivability. A Warlock still needs to rely on Dexterity, and the Monk's defensive stats are unchanged by going from Dexterity to Wisdom.

Consider how powerful/common Paladin levels with Hexblade are. Now expect the same thing with Eldritch Knights and Artificers, except now it's less Divine Smite and more Sentinel+Shield. So that's going to be...fun.

[samcifer]

TBH, I hate that they got rid of the gunsmith variation. I really liked that one and even got a chance to play it in a one-off session last year. I would've been okay with it being nerfed a bit, but to get rid of it entirely sucks.

[Rukelnikov]

The concerns are probably related to defense.

With Bladesinger, you can afford to focus strictly on Intelligence, allowing you to rock a crazy high AC for minimal cost.

With Eldritch Knight, you can afford to focus on Intelligence and keep Strength as your secondary. Strength is more efficient, in terms of both gold cost and stats, at lower values when it comes to determining AC. It's a better secondary/tertiary stat than Dexterity, hands down.

Note that with the Hexblade or Monk Shillelagh builds, nothing that they gain from having a mental attack stat will actually improve their survivability. A Warlock still needs to rely on Dexterity, and the Monk's defensive stats are unchanged by going from Dexterity to Wisdom.

Consider how powerful/common Paladin levels with Hexblade are. Now expect the same thing with Eldritch Knights and Artificers, except now it's less Divine Smite and more Sentinel+Shield. So that's going to be...fun.

I agree, except the Bladesinger bit, you still need to pump Dex to get good armor since light is the only you can wear, and unless its a low magic campaign where getting gear may become difficult, getting 3 more lvls in Wizard seems like the better option IMO.

[Man_Over_Game]

TBH, I hate that they got rid of the gunsmith variation. I really liked that one and even got a chance to play it in a one-off session last year. I would've been okay with it being nerfed a bit, but to get rid of it entirely sucks.

There is a small mention of gun stuff in a sidebar near the front of the UA. Basically, it says that if guns are in your games, Artificers gain proficiency in them. Beyond that, I'd just use the Artillerist and replace the word "Wand" with "Firearm".

So now your pistol has two modes:

Kill it
Kill it (WITH FIRE)



I agree, except the Bladesinger bit, you still need to pump Dex to get good armor since light is the only you can wear, and unless its a low magic campaign where getting gear may become difficult, getting 3 more lvls in Wizard seems like the better option IMO.

That's a possibility, but you could just choose to not be a melee combatant for 2 fights. Play it like you would a Barbarian: Aggressive when you can, caution the few times you can't. In this case, "caution" simply means Fireball and Hypnotic Pattern, the same stuff any other Wizard would be doing.

[Rukelnikov]

That's a possibility, but you could just choose to not be a melee combatant for 2 fights. Play it like you would a Barbarian: Aggressive when you can, caution the few times you can't. In this case, "caution" simply means Fireball and Hypnotic Pattern, the same stuff any other Wizard would be doing.

Yeah. Much to my dismay Bladesingers are more caster than melee :(

[samcifer]

Yeah. Much to my dismay Bladesingers are more caster than melee :(

It's the low hp and needing to also boost strength or dex for hitting and damage that make bladesingers so poor. If they had a hp boost and could use intelligence for their weapon attacks they'd be worthwhile.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Consider how powerful/common Paladin levels with Hexblade are. Now expect the same thing with Eldritch Knights and Artificers, except now it's less Divine Smite and more Sentinel+Shield. So that's going to be...fun.
Paladin/Hexblade is common because it can reach a more than viable power curve by level 3. They have the option to start Hexblade and have become (S)ingle (A)bility (D)ependent right out of character creation, at level 1.

Artificers, even without multiclassing, cannot make use of martial fighting using their intelligence until level 3. It's not much better for a prospective EK who has chosen to start as a fighter for its proficiencies.

Early levels are a big deal, unless you're starting at a level where those synergies are already "unlocked" you risk a higher chance of an early death committing to eventually being a skilled martial, but for now being an only slightly more durable wizard with worse spell slot economy and less versatile offensive cantrip options.

Hexblade is powerful because it takes so little commitment and synergizes with 3 of the classes available in 5e, one of which being Paladin who many argue is only competing with Moon Druids in the "most mechanically powerful class" competition. Artificer requires substantially more commitment in comparison and only truly synergizes with 1 out of 12, because intelligence is not used often in this edition. I don't think it hurts the game to incentivize having less characters dump intelligence.

It's easy to forget that prior to SCAG, EK was fairly mediocre. It was more efficient (and probably still is) to be only just smart enough to read and just roll with wizard spells that don't require your intelligence at all. Shield doesn't require you to be smart, Booming Blade doesn't require you to be smart, GFB is only marginally benefited by how smart you are. I just don't see the correlation between Charisma, where the classes using it gain so much from being able to use it exclusively and Intelligence where Wizards have sat alone in prioritizing it since the editions release.

Just a small nitpick as well, being able to use intelligence as their primary stat doesn't make them any more effective at Sentinel+Shield or War Caster+Booming Blade shenanigans than they would have been without it.

I feel a disclaimer after that wall of text is warranted: This is my opinion, I'm not trying to say that anyone is wrong for disagreeing.

[Rukelnikov]

It's the low hp and needing to also boost strength or dex for hitting and damage that make bladesingers so poor. If they had a hp boost and could use intelligence for their weapon attacks they'd be worthwhile.

My main problem is their lack of damage, I feel they are kinda forced to dip 2 lvls of Pally to be relevant later on.

[jas61292]

I struggling to see how attacking with Int on a halfcaster is more OP than attacking Cha (for double damage I think) on a fullcaster.

Its not. That doesn't mean its a good, balanced idea. It just means the Hexblade should never have been published. Hexblade the only published subclass outright banned from my group's table, and I'd bet we are hardly the only group to feel that way.

Int for attack may not be terrible by itself, at level 3, but it is a potentially unbalancing mechanic on a subclass that does not need it when it is totally focused on being a better beastmaster.

[GlenSmash!]

Its not. That doesn't mean its a good, balanced idea. It just means the Hexblade should never have been published. Hexblade the only published subclass outright banned from my group's table, and I'd bet we are hardly the only group to feel that way.

Int for attack may not be terrible by itself, at level 3, but it is a potentially unbalancing mechanic on a subclass that does not need it when it is totally focused on being a better beastmaster.

Ugh. I could cut the pet part right out of it, or at least limit it to a single subclass. Maybe a couple of subclasses.

[Man_Over_Game]

Just a small nitpick as well, being able to use intelligence as their primary stat doesn't make them any more effective at Sentinel+Shield or War Caster+Booming Blade shenanigans than they would have been without it.

I feel a disclaimer after that wall of text is warranted: This is my opinion, I'm not trying to say that anyone is wrong for disagreeing.

You make some really good points, especially about the level considerations.

The reason I mentioned the Shield + Sentinel combo is because an Eldritch Knight will have much more capacity to use those things. Artificer will grant the EK more low level spell slots, and the Companion will work well with Sentinel. It's not directly related to EK, but it does mean that the EK will have less of a requirement for ASIs (as a small investment into Strength is all that'd be needed to rank up AC).

I could see an Battle Smith 4, Eldritch Knight 16 build, grabbing War Caster, Sentinel, Polearm Master and Spell Sniper. Lots of possible shenanigans.

[Kane0]

I don't think the Int to attack/damage is bad on it's own, it's just that the Battle Smith gets so many nice things. It's cherry picking from the Hexblade, Ranger and Paladin.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I don't think the Int to attack/damage is bad on it's own, it's just that the Battle Smith gets so many nice things. It's cherry picking from the Hexblade, Ranger and Paladin.

This, I agree with. It's just a bit too versatile in what it does. Nothing that can't be fixed in the future.

[Wildarm]

Another build idea GWM Battle Smith. This one working off the Help action of the Iron Guardian. Probably best combined with an Elf for Elven Accuracy

High Elf Battle Smith 8
Str 8 Dex 16 Con 15 Int 16 Wis 10 Cha 8
Cantrip: Mage Hand
ASI: Elven Accuracy(+1 Int), GWM, +1 Int/Con, +2 Int

Infusions:
+1 Half Plate
+1 Glaive

Bonus Action - Command IG to use Help Action
2 Attacks with 10' reach and one with Triple Advantage /w GWM - 1d10+4+1d6(Arcane Weapon)+10(GWM) = 46 damage average with a very good chance to hit for first strike.
Your AC is not that great till level 12 when it should jump to a respectable 20(+2 Half Plate + Cloak of Protection) with your IG forcing disadvantage on one attack a round.

Can easily switch to a long bow + Arcane Weapon to have a reasonable ranged attack too.

[Anderlith]

Anyone else want to see an All Artificer Party?

Battlesmith for the Fighter
Artillerist for the Mage
Alchemist for the Cleric
Archivist for the Rogue

Also, I highly disagree with people wanting to nerf Battlesmith. They don’t have a d10HD like most frontliners, they don’t come online until far later than Hexblades & Bladesingers. The Iron Defender isn’t a “full” pet. None of the Artificers have a “pet” in the sense everyone is making it out to be. The Artificer had Craft Homunculus as a class ability from the beginning, as well as introducing a line of new Homunculus types for a variety of roles. I love the direction the Artificer has taken. Though the Artillerist needs a “not cantrip” like the Archivist for really good blast damage & the turret would be better styled as the flying crossbow Homunculus from Eberron.

[Rukelnikov]

Anyone else want to see an All Artificer Party?

Battlesmith for the Fighter
Artillerist for the Mage
Alchemist for the Cleric
Archivist for the Rogue

Also, I highly disagree with people wanting to nerf Battlesmith. They don’t have a d10HD like most frontliners, they don’t come online until far later than Hexblades & Bladesingers. The Iron Defender isn’t a “full” pet. None of the Artificers have a “pet” in the sense everyone is making it out to be. The Artificer had Craft Homunculus as a class ability from the beginning, as well as introducing a line of new Homunculus types for a variety of roles. I love the direction the Artificer has taken. Though the Artillerist needs a “not cantrip” like the Archivist for really good blast damage & the turret would be better styled as the flying crossbow Homunculus from Eberron.

By lvl 2 they are very much online.

+1 weapon and armor, shield, 14 Dex, arcane weapon:

AC: 19
Rapier: +5, damage 1d8+3+1d6(11)

By lvl 3 they should be able to craft half plate, and switch to Int as attack stat:

AC: 20
Attack: +6, 1d8+4+1d6(13)

And that's for melee, a ranged Vhuman starting with XBE, is likely amongst the best 2nd lvl ranged.

AC: 19
HXB: +5, 2x 2d6+3(10), 20 damage average, bypass resistance to nonmag.

[Anderlith]

By lvl 2 they are very much online.

+1 weapon and armor, shield, 14 Dex, arcane weapon:

AC: 19
Rapier: +5, damage 1d8+3+1d6(11)

By lvl 3 they should be able to craft half plate, and switch to Int as attack stat:

AC: 20
Attack: +6, 1d8+4+1d6(13)

And that's for melee, a ranged Vhuman starting with XBE, is likely amongst the best 2nd lvl ranged.

AC: 19
HXB: +5, 2x 2d6+3(10), 20 damage average, bypass resistance to nonmag.

How are you going to wield that Rapier at level 2? Trade that for a mace, or since you seem to want a dex melee, a dagger

[Makorel]

Pretty much every Artificer can take crossbow expert, enchant it to +1 or 2 and pre-apply an Arcane Weapon to do damage that's well above baseline. Perhaps Int to weapon attacks is unnecessary for the Battle Smith, but I appreciate the weapon variety it opens up without having to pray to the dice gods for good rolls on strength in addition to int dex and con.

The Iron Defender's bonus action scaling attack also lowers the opportunity cost of not taking crossbow expert, adding more incentive to pick up other weapons. Why can't the Beastmaster's companion attacks also be a bonus action, or have 5 HP per level like these companions do? I come from the land of video games so perhaps I'm spoiled by how easy it is to patch an imbalance.

Also Battle Smith is the only Artificer that doesn't have to make the uncomfortable choice of doing good weapon damage or raising their main stat, and that's important because for some of these subclasses the Int damage abilities they get don't compare to the Artificer's weapon damage potential. Artillerist I think can still do fine because they've got a good selection of damage dealing leveled spells as well as their turret on top but Alchemist and Archivist have to make the hard call because they're relying on cantrip damage if they focus on Int.

I want to talk in depth about Information Overload. IO forces a good saving throw, has a good damage type, you can smite off of it and you add your Int-mod to it but even still the average damage is below par because it doesn't get save for half, and you can't try 2 or 3 times per round to get that smite damage like Paladin can. It's better than most cantrips but still not in the ball park of Agonizing Eldritch Blast unless you burn spell slots to power it up and at that point you would be better off using those slots for leveled spells like most cantrip classes, or I would say that if you had good damage spells to use them on like Artillerist does. Archivist is probably the weakest of the subclasses because you have to use your action and bonus action for this ability where other Artificers get their companion ability on top of their regular action, although maybe that's intentional considering the utility it gets.

[Rukelnikov]

How are you going to wield that Rapier at level 2? Trade that for a mace, or since you seem to want a dex melee, a dagger

True.

Dagger is an important diminish in damage, I still think they are viable since lvl 2 thx to their AC.

[Wildarm]

I want to talk in depth about Information Overload. IO forces a good saving throw, has a good damage type, you can smite off of it and you add your Int-mod to it but even still the average damage is below par because it doesn't get save for half, and you can't try 2 or 3 times per round to get that smite damage like Paladin can. It's better than most cantrips but still not in the ball park of Agonizing Eldritch Blast unless you burn spell slots to power it up and at that point you would be better off using those slots for leveled spells like most cantrip classes, or I would say that if you had good damage spells to use them on like Artillerist does. Archivist is probably the weakest of the subclasses because you have to use your action and bonus action for this ability where other Artificers get their companion ability on top of their regular action, although maybe that's intentional considering the utility it gets.

IO definitely is an interesting ability. Intelligence saves on monsters are fairly easy to predict. You can guess who will have a -4, 0 and +4(or more). Say Tier 2 - DC 15 will hit 90% of the time on beasts and un-intelligent monsters. 70% against most other creatures and maybe 50% vs very intelligent opponents. The raw damage isn't that high 2d8+Int but solid enough and gives advantage to the next attack on the monster which you could consider boosting the effective damage by maybe 25% if you consider how often advantage would change an allies miss into a hit. Overall if you did the math I suspect it would be very competitive with Toll the Dead on a Cleric with potent cantrip or Firebolt on a Dragon Sorcerer. Still no EB but you have the option to burn spell slots and smite for extra damage(similar to quickening a cantrip) and at level 14, stun your opponent. I think this cantrip plus some low level spell slots can single handedly stunlock something with low intelligence. -2 to -4 to Int saves are quite common.

Of more interest to me is still the crazy range you can cast spells at with your MAM with no real fear of repercussions. Phantasmal Killer is particularly insidious to use though it requires a lot of failed will saves. 4d10+5 damage per round that no one can see other than a faint glowing thing of your choice. Modify memory is also particularly nasty to use from 300' away. Kill the king in his bed with psychic damage, modify the queens memory that she did not see a glowing thing and that he had a heart attack.

You won't be winning any DPS wars with the Archivist but you will do consistent damage, have some nova and generally get to help your team every round. Plus have some pretty nifty tricks up your sleeve.

[Trustypeaches]

On a side note, I’m very much happy with the Artificer’s revised spell list, although I still feel the Alchemist’s Spell List needs some help (mass cure Wounds, polymorph, contagion..?)

I also think the “Use an Object” Action should be added to the list of commands that can be given to the Homunculus, so that it can deliver potions as a bonus action.

[Makorel]

IO definitely is an interesting ability. Intelligence saves on monsters are fairly easy to predict. You can guess who will have a -4, 0 and +4(or more). Say Tier 2 - DC 15 will hit 90% of the time on beasts and un-intelligent monsters. 70% against most other creatures and maybe 50% vs very intelligent opponents. The raw damage isn't that high 2d8+Int but solid enough and gives advantage to the next attack on the monster which you could consider boosting the effective damage by maybe 25% if you consider how often advantage would change an allies miss into a hit. Overall if you did the math I suspect it would be very competitive with Toll the Dead on a Cleric with potent cantrip or Firebolt on a Dragon Sorcerer. Still no EB but you have the option to burn spell slots and smite for extra damage(similar to quickening a cantrip) and at level 14, stun your opponent. I think this cantrip plus some low level spell slots can single handedly stunlock something with low intelligence. -2 to -4 to Int saves are quite common.

Of more interest to me is still the crazy range you can cast spells at with your MAM with no real fear of repercussions. Phantasmal Killer is particularly insidious to use though it requires a lot of failed will saves. 4d10+5 damage per round that no one can see other than a faint glowing thing of your choice. Modify memory is also particularly nasty to use from 300' away. Kill the king in his bed with psychic damage, modify the queens memory that she did not see a glowing thing and that he had a heart attack.

You won't be winning any DPS wars with the Archivist but you will do consistent damage, have some nova and generally get to help your team every round. Plus have some pretty nifty tricks up your sleeve.

Maybe I am overestimating how good monsters' Int saves are. It's kind of a weird perfect storm of small qualities that I didn't think add up to more than the sum of their parts.

I wasn't sure how to quantify the advantage on the next hit so I left it out of my analysis to focus on the raw damage, but I will say the stun effect is obviously powerful though it comes on pretty late.

For the record I don't consider Toll the Dead with Potent Cantrip or Firebolt with Draconic Ancestry to be good power. When I was playing my Dragon Sorc I spent most turns casting Fireball with Draconic Ancestry. It worked so well I melted down my 1st and 2nd level spell slots so I could cast more Fireball. For the time I played the character since I got Fireball at level 5 up until level 7 I had no reason to cast a single cantrip. Archivist obviously has more reason to since they don't have many good damage spells and can squeeze IO further with the extra damage kicker.

The Archivist's Psychic Damage is also comparable to Draconic Ancestry for damage spells, but you don't get the AOE of fireball to build off of. I did miss Phantasmal Killer in the spell list but I think more psychic spells would be nice. Phantasmal Force might actually be really great for doing damage over time with this ability.

[Spectrulus]

...The Archivist's Psychic Damage is also comparable to Draconic Ancestry for damage spells, but you don't get the AOE of fireball to build off of. I did miss Phantasmal Killer in the spell list but I think more psychic spells would be nice. Phantasmal Force might actually be really great for doing damage over time with this ability.

I could see it getting Synaptic Static, but then again probably not.

I find it most fascinating that the Archivist can through rests have any proficiency in skills they need.

I also appreciate that the Battle Smith makes a mechanical war pet, rather than going the +1hp/level route or something else. It helps the sub type be a more impressive melee force, by getting more HP, and basically capping at 3 attacks a round.

I wonder if artificers would be able to infuse their own pets?

[OvisCaedo]

I wonder if artificers would be able to infuse their own pets?

I don't think any of the infusions seem like they'd apply directly to a construct... But you could probably GIVE it some infused items. Its strength never scales naturally, but you could probably manage to swing a custom set of "gauntlets" for it to slap down some Ogre Power onto, or fit a hill giant belt if you get to a REALLY high level.

[Finback]

Soldier or Folk Hero both would work very well.

iirc, there's an entire film about a local kid who fought off two rogues who'd been plaguing his town for ages, using only gadgets he improvised from around the farmstead.

"Gnome Alone".

[Foxhound438]

Well, first of all, I'm most surprised they never took the time to ask anyone what they thought of the first one. Sure, they could come read the forum hot takes as well as anyone else, but a survey of the first version would have at least made them aware of some of the popular "sticking points". Prime example:



- It has 6 "-" levels and a few levels with what is essentially just ribbons on top of that. These levels coincide with either getting a new spell level or new infusion known. For comparison, other half-casters have 3 "-" levels.


This was a problem that could have very easily been addressed between versions, as it existed in the first and more than one person suggested matching the new infusion option level gate offs match those - levels, but WotC seems to have either missed that or for some reason are being dense about it.

(you mention also the alchemist having largely bad spells, and I agree. That's not the end of the problems here though, as I would like to see them get more utility than "lesser/greater resto once each as your features" at higher levels.)

And for another example of things that would have been caught in the survey, the THP turret is still mathematically overtuned just about any way you look at it.


- I still don't like the alchemical homunculous. A pet for every subclass is not necessary and I would argue is detrimental (takes up design space and makes subclasses less distinguishable rather than more)
- The later alchemist abilities are still relatively lacklustre
- Archivist really needs toning down. level 3 grants interchageable skills + super-familiar + uber-cantrip that can be smite boosted and gets better at 6 and 14, level 6 is interplanar communication, level 14 is 2nd level spell slot teleports.
- Battle Smith also needs toning down. You get a better beastmaster companion (which is fine, but if we can have this and it works then DO IT FOR THE RANGER THEN), Int to damage ala hexblade plus all the smite spells, IDS or actionless/resourceless heals at level 6 and an improvement to all of the above at level 14

Definitely agree about the alchemist, it should look more like it did in the first (1/3 caster) version than this... whatever it's supposed to be.

As for other subclasses, I don't think they're really overpowered that much. Archivist does get a "strictly better find familiar", but so does POTC warlock and no one takes that. The uber cantrip isn't any more uber than a cleric's sacred flame (and decidedly lacks something like spirit guardians on the class to bring up the sustained damage), and 2nd level spell slot teleports are pretty popular among most 3rd level casters anyways. Battle smith definitively doesn't get IDS and resourceless heals at level 6, it's int mod uses per long rest, and the companion being better than beastmaster's... well, it has to be, doesn't it. I really don't mind int to damage, I'm already used to the "why don't you save stats and take 2 levels of hexblade" meme. I'm especially not worried about all the smite spells, because first of all they compete with your bonus action to just making your dog attack, and second, most of the ones you get aren't that great by my estimation.

Anyways, there are issues that fell through the cracks that no one bothered to check for, but I am happy with this batch of add-ons at least. If I were to build one it'd probably be a battle smith since its companion is the least convoluted and weird, and the non-smite spells aren't terrible. Kind of a shame that the pet's AC doesn't ever scale, as is you'd end up with a thing that's just going to get hit no matter what.

[Constructman]

SNIP
I think they mentioned that they would be working on adding more stuff for the Artificer before soliciting feedback and changig stuff (so why dud they remove Shield of Faith from the spell list??????). Given that the UA survey for it isn't out yet, that seens to be what happened. But now it's out, so the survey should be coming out shortly.

[Arkhios]

I think they mentioned that they would be working on adding more stuff for the Artificer before soliciting feedback and changig stuff (so why dud they remove Shield of Faith from the spell list??????). Given that the UA survey for it isn't out yet, that seens to be what happened. But now it's out, so the survey should be coming out shortly.

If I had to guess, Shield of Faith implies the reason why. Arcane magic isn't about faith.

[Damon_Tor]

So Spell Storing Item still doesn't appear to require anybody's concentration as neither the artificer nor the end user is actually "casting" the spell in question. 10 Uses of a level 1 or 2 spell per day with no concentration is pretty solid.

[Theodoxus]

My complaint: All spells known makes wizards cry. Should have a spellbook, or at the very least, some kludged up version of a spellbook, like a mechanics manual or etched metal plates... something. All spells known makes no sense. They aren't getting these from some outside or divine source... they just what, traveled around before taking a level; a soldier or folk hero or hermit and just poof! "Huh, I suddenly know so many spells!"

My likes: I hope they revise the beast master to follow the battle smith. Heck, I'd be happy with a "familiar-esque" animal companion that's just a nature spirit in wolf form type thing. Makes just as much sense to be able to resurrect such a critter with a spell slot expenditure and can heal it the same way. A physical manifestation of a spiritual being can let you do exactly the same stuff as the battle smith's pet - magical attack, boosts to abilities, etc. (I find it odd that the Iron Defender has +4 to their perception, their perception increases with caster PB, but their passive is 10. With a 10 Wis, it should be +2 and 12; so... yeah.)

I also really really like they're taking some concepts from 4E that I've been using for months now. Personally, the artificier as built out, makes a better example of the next iteration of D&D (5.5 or 6th) as it introduces a few too many new mechanics that aren't in the base game, but I'm happy to see WotC at least think about incorporating these ideas.

Overall: The class definitely needs a bit of refinement. It's a cleric/mage/thief class that brings too much from each into the fold. And the subclasses bring the class over the top. The base would be sufficient, honestly.

[jaappleton]

Put me into the camp that believes Battle Smith should be split into two:

Iron Defender focused, and... Red Mage focused, I suppose. Because that’s what it is, it’s totally a Red Mage. The Battle pet should be it’s own thing.

[Wildarm]

So Spell Storing Item still doesn't appear to require anybody's concentration as neither the artificer nor the end user is actually "casting" the spell in question. 10 Uses of a level 1 or 2 spell per day with no concentration is pretty solid.

Hmmm Had not noticed the wording on that was produce the spell's effect. The does seem to imply that you can indeed ignore concentration. That opens up some more options. Being able to change the spell each long rest is nice.

Assuming no concentration, here are a few ideas:

- Enhance Ability seems OK. 10x per day you give advantage on whatever ability check you want for an hour. Help action renders this pointless in many cases but Con at least can give your party 2d6 Temp HP. Top it off during the day for anyone who takes damage. Giving entire team advantage on stealth is great as well.
- Invisibility - Always start an encounter invisible. Mass invisibility 2x per day for the whole team as well.
- Longstrider - Doesn't need concentration but you can give the whole party +10 movement 2x a day for an hour
- See Invisibility - Niche use but useful to have on the whole party in a fight where you expect invisible/ethereal enemies.
- Alter Self - Instant disguise for the entire group. Waterbreathing for whole group as well
- Levitate - Poor mans mass fly
- Protection from poison - Poor mans hero's feast
- Warding Bond - This is the weird one and perhaps the most interesting/game changing. It can effectively give your party +1 to AC and saves and you are now sort of operating as one huge HP pool:

Each person in the party casts warding bond on the next. Last person casts it on the first. If you have someone with natural resistance such as a Bear Totem Barbarian, you could end the chain with him instead so he soaks damage himself halving it all. With rounding you can effectively reduce the total damage and spread it around the whole party:

Example: 4 person party - 10 damage attack on A

A takes 5
B takes 2
C takes 1
D takes 0

Bigger damage example with 45 damage

A takes 22
B takes 11
C takes 5
D takes 2
A takes 1
B takes 0

Combine with smaller consistent heals from something like healing spirit or upcast heroism and you get some nice robustness. Downside is your casters will have to make a lot of concentration checks(I expect any caster to be able to handle DC 10 concentration checks at this point though) and it will slow down the game in general as you play the pass the damage along game with each hit. Pretty cool combo though and a slight defense buff to the whole team. Lasts for an hour and you can do it 2x per day. Have to stay withing 60' of each other as well.

[Seclora]

Put me into the camp that believes Battle Smith should be split into two:

Iron Defender focused, and... Red Mage focused, I suppose. Because that’s what it is, it’s totally a Red Mage. The Battle pet should be it’s own thing.

Agreed.

Make a Gish-y Battlesmith that enhances their weapon attacks and can use spell slots to negate damage by channeling them into armor. All while using their Int on weapon attacks. Make them the all Artificer Party's tank, focused on reducing incoming damage and diverting attacks onto them with magnets and such. Maybe give them Superior Arcane Armament to give them a third attack.

Then make a Mechanist who creates a mechanical pal who's fun to be around and maybe give them some battlefield control options. The Iron Defender alone takes up most of this class, but they should probably have a strongly support spell list and be expected to rely on basic chassis cantrips and Arcane Armanent for their own damage output.

[Matticusrex]

I hope this class signals that they will start balancing the power level around the higher end (paladins and casters). No one wants their dream class to be as weak as fighters and rangers or having a huge reliance on short rests like monks. Artificer looks incredibly solid so far.

[Anderlith]

Put me into the camp that believes Battle Smith should be split into two:

Iron Defender focused, and... Red Mage focused, I suppose. Because that’s what it is, it’s totally a Red Mage. The Battle pet should be it’s own thing.
A Hexblade pact of the chain is more powerful.
Let the Battlesmith keep his little pupper

[MaxWilson]

My big takeaway from this UA:

There's nothing wrong with switching Beastmaster-pet commanding from an action to a bonus action. If it's good for the Battle Smith, it's good for the Beastmaster.

[detro]

Rereading the battlesmith, they could actually function pretty much independently of the defender.
The only real feature they lose is 1/2 of the 14th level features ("Whenever your iron defender uses its Defensive Pounce, the attacker takes force damage equal to 1d4 + your Intelligence modifier"). Which was ridiculous anyways, no other class gets resourceless automatic damage as a reaction.
Battlesmith is so overloaded with features they are practically 2 subclasses in one. You could completely ignore the pet and you would still be effective. The defender is just a free pool of hit points, damage, and utility on top of a strong subclass chassis.

[Spiritchaser]

A Hexblade pact of the chain is more powerful.
Let the Battlesmith keep his little pupper

But do they need to occupy the same space conceptually?

Power balance is easy to change if needed

[jaappleton]

Here’s my big issue with the Iton Defender:

There’s tons of ways to generate a bonus action attack. The double Scimitar, PAM Feat, Crossbow Expert Feat, doing it with right the Greatweapon Master Feat...

Why would I attack with the Iron Defender? I suppose if I were in a Feat-less game, sure. But aside from that... This is an issue I have with the Artificer in general:

Why use the Artillerist turret to attack, when I can attack? Why use the Iron Defender to attack, when I can? Why use the Alchemical Homonculus to attack, when I can? And especially when my attacks do superior damage, and have a better attack roll?

I like Battle Smith, I do, but the only thing I’d use the Defender for is it’s Reaction.

[Anderlith]

But do they need to occupy the same space conceptually?

Power balance is easy to change if needed

They needn’t be, but you & others are making a case that it makes them “too powerful”, or that they should take the Battlesmith’s loyal doggo away from them. Heedless of the fact that Artificers have ALWAYS had Homunculi. Artificer’s aren’t suddenly the “pet class” if anything one should take the great ideas here & adapt them to a feasible Ranger, not nerf it into the ground because it does it better

[Wildarm]

Here’s my big issue with the Iton Defender:

There’s tons of ways to generate a bonus action attack. The double Scimitar, PAM Feat, Crossbow Expert Feat, doing it with right the Greatweapon Master Feat...

Why would I attack with the Iron Defender? I suppose if I were in a Feat-less game, sure. But aside from that... This is an issue I have with the Artificer in general:

Why use the Artillerist turret to attack, when I can attack? Why use the Iron Defender to attack, when I can? Why use the Alchemical Homonculus to attack, when I can? And especially when my attacks do superior damage, and have a better attack roll?

I like Battle Smith, I do, but the only thing I’d use the Defender for is it’s Reaction.

You attack with the ID because it requires no resources to get that bonus action attack. Why would you invest a feat into something else just to get a slightly better attack? Outside of GWM or SS there are very few overwhelmingly better things to do with your bonus action. ID does decent damage(1d8+Prof), as much as most bonus action attacks outside of the big damage boosters or adding smites. It's the same reason monks are nice. You always get at bonus action unarmed strike with scaling damage for no cost.

In addition, if your ID is a damaging threat it makes it much more likely that enemies will attack it. That's exactly what you want as it has it's own HP recovery mechanism in battle and you can restore it to max HP outside of battle with a cantrip or a spell slot to rebuild it. Any damage your ID is taking is fantastic. Every attack that targets it, is one less targeting the rest of the team.

[Man_Over_Game]

You attack with the ID because it requires no resources to get that bonus action attack. Why would you invest a feat into something else just to get a slightly better attack? Outside of GWM or SS there are very few overwhelmingly better things to do with your bonus action. ID does decent damage(1d8+Prof), as much as most bonus action attacks outside of the big damage boosters or adding smites. It's the same reason monks are nice. You always get at bonus action unarmed strike with scaling damage for no cost.

In addition, if your ID is a damaging threat it makes it much more likely that enemies will attack it. That's exactly what you want as it has it's own HP recovery mechanism in battle and you can restore it to max HP outside of battle with a cantrip or a spell slot to rebuild it. Any damage your ID is taking is fantastic. You want it to bite things and make them attack it.

Well said.

A Paladin can get those feats and do well, sure, but the Artificer won't have to. The Artificer will be the one stacking up ASIs while the Paladin is stuck with a 16 as his best stat.

[Wildarm]

Well said.

A Paladin can get those feats and do well, sure, but the Artificer won't have to. The Artificer will be the one stacking up ASIs while the Paladin is stuck with a 16 as his best stat.

Res(Wis) and Res(Dex) look pretty appealing at Level 12/16 for a Battle Smith once you max Intelligence. You're level 20 saves could look something like +10/+18/+20/+18/+21/+9.

[jaappleton]

Res(Wis) and Res(Dex) look pretty appealing at Level 12/16 for a Battle Smith once you max Intelligence. You're level 20 saves could look something like +10/+18/+20/+18/+21/+9.

Then be within 30ft of a Paladin for +5 to all of those.

[AdAstra]

Here’s my big issue with the Iton Defender:

There’s tons of ways to generate a bonus action attack. The double Scimitar, PAM Feat, Crossbow Expert Feat, doing it with right the Greatweapon Master Feat...

Why would I attack with the Iron Defender? I suppose if I were in a Feat-less game, sure. But aside from that... This is an issue I have with the Artificer in general:

Why use the Artillerist turret to attack, when I can attack? Why use the Iron Defender to attack, when I can? Why use the Alchemical Homonculus to attack, when I can? And especially when my attacks do superior damage, and have a better attack roll?

I like Battle Smith, I do, but the only thing I’d use the Defender for is it’s Reaction.

To add on to what other people have said, I think this may be looking at the issue backwards. The use of a bonus action for the Iron Defender's attack was probably to ensure bonus action attacks can't stack with it. It adds to the Battlesmith's combat power without the risk of being overpowered with the addition of say, a bonus action PAM-GWM attack.

EDIT: Come to think of it, a LOT of the wording of the Iron defender seems to be made with reducing interactions with other classes' features in mind. It takes its action immediately after yours, so it's hard to use it as a fighting mount for small races, and it's not a ready partner for sneak attack until the next round. It does, however, potentially combo with features that can knock enemies prone, I guess. Maybe a reason to use RAW Shield Master if you're willing to invest in strength?

[Spiritchaser]

Well said.

A Paladin can get those feats and do well, sure, but the Artificer won't have to. The Artificer will be the one stacking up ASIs while the Paladin is stuck with a 16 as his best stat.

It’s probably excessive that an artificer could quite reasonably stick with 16 int and 14 con to start with, then never spend a point on either, and end up with 19 in both, int at 12 and con at 16 (caveat: if you ever get there)

Even as variant human this gives you a 14 Dex easily, no mandatory dump stats and all the feats you could want.

Seriously, you could take 6 feats (with variant human) and not feel at all challenged

Prodigy? Warcaster? Resilient Wis? Alert? Observant? Lucky?

Heck. Take them all.

Or different ones, I just randomly threw down some favourites.

No I actually don’t think this is optimal, but it’s certainly reasonable with the current rules.

It probably shouldn’t be.

[AdAstra]

Actually, I think the main thing I'd worry about with the Iron Defender is just how damn disposable the thing is. You can heal it for free, albeit slowly, and for one spell slot of any level you can bring it back to life in no time at all as long as you have the body. And even if you lose it entirely, you can make another with a long rest.

In addition, the possibility of giving your Iron defender some of your infused magic items intrigues me. A DM could certainly say that most wouldn't work because of its anatomy, but things like the Belt of Hill giant strength would probably work, and significantly improve its power. Though you might lose out on those attunement slots to up your saves, it might be worth it.

[Wildarm]

Actually, I think the main thing I'd worry about with the Iron Defender is just how damn disposable the thing is. You can heal it for free, albeit slowly, and for one spell slot of any level you can bring it back to life in no time at all as long as you have the body. And even if you lose it entirely, you can make another with a long rest.

In addition, the possibility of giving your Iron defender some of your infused magic items intrigues me. A DM could certainly say that most wouldn't work because of its anatomy, but things like the Belt of Hill giant strength would probably work, and significantly improve its power. Though you might lose out on those attunement slots to up your saves, it might be worth it.

Crafting or Infusing a set of barding for the IG is the primary boost I'd give it. +1 Chain Barding(17AC) or +1 Half Plate Barding(18AC) are good choices. +1 Mithral Plate Barding(19AC) would be costly but nice as well.

[Spiritchaser]

Actually, I think the main thing I'd worry about with the Iron Defender is just how damn disposable the thing is. You can heal it for free, albeit slowly, and for one spell slot of any level you can bring it back to life in no time at all as long as you have the body. And even if you lose it entirely, you can make another with a long rest.

In addition, the possibility of giving your Iron defender some of your infused magic items intrigues me. A DM could certainly say that most wouldn't work because of its anatomy, but things like the Belt of Hill giant strength would probably work, and significantly improve its power. Though you might lose out on those attunement slots to up your saves, it might be worth it.

The first thing I’d do would be to get it some plate barding, then infuse that barding to +1 (+2 at 12th level)

I suppose there might be some that claim that “barding is not the same as a suit of armor and therefore not a valid target for infusions”
I’d say please keep it real, but...

Anyway, +2 plate on cyberkitty could make for a pretty tanky critter

[MaxWilson]

The first thing I’d do would be to get it some plate barding, then infuse that barding to +1 (+2 at 12th level)

I suppose there might be some that claim that “barding is not the same as a suit of armor and therefore not a valid target for infusions”
I’d say please keep it real, but...

Anyway, +2 plate on cyberkitty could make for a pretty tanky critter

What's the point though? Any damage it takes can be immediately fixed via Mending. The last thing you want enemies to do is to give up on hurting it and switch to attacking a PC.

[Man_Over_Game]

What's the point though? Any damage it takes can be immediately fixed via Mending. The last thing you want enemies to do is to give up on hurting it and switch to attacking a PC.

Well, "Immediately" in real-life terms. In DnD terms, it takes 1 minute, which is useless in combat.

[Wildarm]

What's the point though? Any damage it takes can be immediately fixed via Mending. The last thing you want enemies to do is to give up on hurting it and switch to attacking a PC.

Well, getting it's AC up slightly isn't a bad idea. AC15 is pretty easy to hit for most monsters. A boost to 17-19AC still likely puts it lower than yours. The IG will take hits especially against creatures with only a single attack. They will not waste many attacks on you at disadvantage with the IG protecting you with it's reaction. Your IG has decent HP but not fantastic, it will go down in a fight toe to toe with a CR appropriate brute. The AC may give you enough buffer to not have to waste a spell slot or two rebuilding it during the adventuring day.

[Spiritchaser]

What's the point though? Any damage it takes can be immediately fixed via Mending. The last thing you want enemies to do is to give up on hurting it and switch to attacking a PC.

Put it out front, at least two rounds for them to realize they can’t hit it (likely more) another for them to disengage and get around it

3 rounds in? That’s practically half the fight

[MaxWilson]

Put it out front, at least two rounds for them to realize they can’t hit it (likely more) another for them to disengage and get around it

3 rounds in? That’s practically half the fight

Can't you get basically the same effect without the magical barding cost by just letting it Dodge? Same durability, no bonus action cost, no magical item cost, and either way you're threatening the same thing if they try to bypass you without Disengaging (opportunity attack for around 8-10 damage). I guess it depends upon how your DM roleplays the monsters though--it's apparently quite popular for DMs to make Dodging more obvious than magical armor or to rule that monsters want to attack anything that's attacking them.

[Spiritchaser]

Can't you get basically the same effect without the magical barding cost by just letting it Dodge? Same durability, no bonus action cost, no magical item cost, and either way you're threatening the same thing if they try to bypass you without Disengaging (opportunity attack for around 8-10 damage). I guess it depends upon how your DM roleplays the monsters though--it's apparently quite popular for DMs to make Dodging more obvious than magical armor or to rule that monsters want to attack anything that's attacking them.

As a DM I generally have foes gravitate to what they perceive to be the greatest threat.

My DM is actually really good about this, with more intelligent foes barking out orders to direct minions to pivot and attack in intelligent ways, rabidly aggressive wild animals measuring things by size and perhaps who smells of blood, and slack jawed yokels just hitting whatever is close and doesn’t scare them too much.

[Rukelnikov]

My big takeaway from this UA:

There's nothing wrong with switching Beastmaster-pet commanding from an action to a bonus action. If it's good for the Battle Smith, it's good for the Beastmaster.

Careful with that Max, if you switch it to bonus action, by lvl 5 you'd be doing 4 attacks a round, Action = Att + Extra Attack, BA = Beast Attack + Beastmaster extra attack when pet attacks. Also, the class was written with an Action to command the beast in mind, the lvl 7 feature would become redundant, and the lvl 11 feature would allow 3 ranger + 2 pet attacks per round.

IMO, even if you don't use revised ranger, revised Beastmaster does everything as it should have been in the first place.


Rereading the battlesmith, they could actually function pretty much independently of the defender.
The only real feature they lose is 1/2 of the 14th level features ("Whenever your iron defender uses its Defensive Pounce, the attacker takes force damage equal to 1d4 + your Intelligence modifier"). Which was ridiculous anyways, no other class gets resourceless automatic damage as a reaction.
Battlesmith is so overloaded with features they are practically 2 subclasses in one. You could completely ignore the pet and you would still be effective. The defender is just a free pool of hit points, damage, and utility on top of a strong subclass chassis.

Storm Sorcerer get exactly that at lvl 14, and enemies must also save or be pushed away, there probably some other one around.


To add on to what other people have said, I think this may be looking at the issue backwards. The use of a bonus action for the Iron Defender's attack was probably to ensure bonus action attacks can't stack with it. It adds to the Battlesmith's combat power without the risk of being overpowered with the addition of say, a bonus action PAM-GWM attack.

EDIT: Come to think of it, a LOT of the wording of the Iron defender seems to be made with reducing interactions with other classes' features in mind. It takes its action immediately after yours, so it's hard to use it as a fighting mount for small races, and it's not a ready partner for sneak attack until the next round. It does, however, potentially combo with features that can knock enemies prone, I guess. Maybe a reason to use RAW Shield Master if you're willing to invest in strength?

I don't get this, if its next to an enemy i'm attacking that good enough for SA, isn't it?

***************

Regarding the Iron guardian, I see a lot of people saying its like beastmasters pet but better or that BS has 2 subclasses, but is it? Lets compare its stats to the Giant Constrictor Snake, which seems to be referenced pretty frequently when BM comes up:


Iron Guardian

AC = 15
HP = 5*lvl + Int + IG's Con(+2)
Att = 2+Prof
Dam = 1d8+Prof


Giant Constrictor Snake

AC = 14+Prof
HP = 4*lvl
Att = 6+Prof, 10 ft reach
Dam = 1d4+4+Prof, +3d6 save for half



The IG has notably better HP(1*lvl+Int+IG Con), but AC is better for this pet, and attck and damage are basically incomparable.

Granted the IG can attack as a bonus action, but franly, at which point does it stop being useful to spend your BA for a low damage attack with a low chance to hit? My guess is... pretty fast. Arcane Jolt can keep IG's attack relevant a bit longer, but it can only be triggered once per round, so if you hit with your attack, no need to spend BA on IG. Defensive Pounce is its defining feature IMO, it stays strong all the way, and becomes even stronger later on. Immunity to surprised is good, but if you are surprised you cant spend you BA to command it, so it becomes somewhat moot, only for OAs.


Actually, I think the main thing I'd worry about with the Iron Defender is just how damn disposable the thing is. You can heal it for free, albeit slowly, and for one spell slot of any level you can bring it back to life in no time at all as long as you have the body. And even if you lose it entirely, you can make another with a long rest.

In addition, the possibility of giving your Iron defender some of your infused magic items intrigues me. A DM could certainly say that most wouldn't work because of its anatomy, but things like the Belt of Hill giant strength would probably work, and significantly improve its power. Though you might lose out on those attunement slots to up your saves, it might be worth it.

This is true though, its awfully expendable, as long as you win the encounter you can revive it to full for just a 1st lvl slot, and if it didn't die, you don't even spend a 1st lvl slot...

OTOH, what reason does an enemy have for attacking it? its damage will be way below the rest of the party (in 99% of cases), and if it uses its reaction on OAs then its not doing Defensive Pounce, most enemies won't know this though, so they should treat it as threat, but after second round they may pick up to it.

IDK, I think its good, but nowhere as good as a Chain Familiar, and we've already been comparing Locks to BSs for some reason, so I think its pretty ok.

[Trustypeaches]

In comparing the Alchemist’s Homunculus with the BattleSmith Pet...

The Homunculus is substantially easier to keep alive, with a flight speed and ranged attack to keep it out of most enemies attack range or the probably center of AoE spells. However, it cannot apply pressure on enemies as well as the Pupper, who can take opportunity attacks, block spaces as a medium creature, etc.

The Homunculus has more versatile combat usage, able to apply temp Hp to weak targets, provide advantage on skill checks to grapplers and counterspellers, etc. But the Battlepet can consistently apply disadvantage on enemies...

I’d say they’re both good, but I’d probably let the Homunculus “Use an Item” as one of the bonus action commands so that it can function as a potion-delivery service.

[jaappleton]

Does anything prevent a Small character from mounting the Iron Guardian and using the Reaction ability every round?

[Monster Manuel]

Not sure if this has come up in the thread yet or not (I confess I skimmed some of the middle to review in more detail later), but I think there's a discrepancy in some of the wording of the Archivist.

Early on it says that when they manifest their mind, it's intangible and invulnerable.

Later on, while describing Information Overload, it says that attacks on the Mind have disadvantage while it's overloading. Why would that matter, if it is intangible and invulnerable?

Am I reading that wrong, and it's meant that the Artificer themselves grant advantage when attacked while the Mind is Overloading? Or is this a bug?

[Man_Over_Game]

Does anything prevent a Small character from mounting the Iron Guardian and using the Reaction ability every round?

Not really, besides the janktastic mount rules.

You and your mount still have separate turns, so if you want to mount your beast, the beast's movement is separate from yours. This means that you can't do hit-and-run tactics without you Readying your action before your mount moves, and it means that enemies will be more likely to attack you (as any attack that can be made on the mount can instead be directed at the rider).

It's not a terrible combo, though. With some Cavalier levels, for easy modifications to your strategy, higher HP pool, better armor and eventual Mounted Combatant feat, it'd be a good strategy. Just keep in mind that the default Artificer companion is designed to take hits for you, and riding it will basically reverse the roles. And the default Artificer is about as tanky as a Druid.

[Rukelnikov]

Does anything prevent a Small character from mounting the Iron Guardian and using the Reaction ability every round?

That's my plan with a Rock Gnome, the sub seems almost custom made for them.

[jaappleton]

Not really, besides the janktastic mount rules.

You and your mount still have separate turns, so if you want to mount your beast, the beast's movement is separate from yours. This means that you can't do hit-and-run tactics without you Readying your action before your mount moves, and it means that enemies will be more likely to attack you (as any attack that can be made on the mount can instead be directed at the rider).

It's not a terrible combo, though. With some Cavalier levels, for easy modifications to your strategy, higher HP pool, better armor and eventual Mounted Combatant feat, it'd be a good strategy. Just keep in mind that the default Artificer companion is designed to take hits for you, and riding it will basically reverse the roles. And the default Artificer is about as tanky as a Druid.

Well, a Gnome's speed is 25ft.

Iron Guardian's speed is 40.

"Hi ho Silver, awaaayyy!"

Riding it while shooting an infinitely reloading crossbow via infusions seems like a pretty good way to kite enemies. Sure, there's more optimal things you could do, but are there more fun things?

[MaxWilson]

Careful with that Max, if you switch it to bonus action, by lvl 5 you'd be doing 4 attacks a round, Action = Att + Extra Attack, BA = Beast Attack + Beastmaster extra attack when pet attacks.

The Beastmaster attack-when-your-pet-takes-the-Attack-Action clause would go away as part of the rewrite--it's no longer needed.


Also, the class was written with an Action to command the beast in mind, the lvl 7 feature would become redundant, and the lvl 11 feature would allow 3 ranger + 2 pet attacks per round.

Acknowledged. You'd need to rewrite some of the other features including the level 7 feature.

Net effect is that a level 5 Beastmaster would getting Attack + Extra Attack + Beast Attack at level 5, which seems okay, considering that a level 5 Fighter can get beast attacks also just by purchasing a bunch of mastiffs.

I should mention that I've started giving summons and hirelings a share of the combat XP, which IMO is the only way to make summoning spells and Animate Dead a situational tactic instead of an obvious go-to tactic. (Your share of the total XP is your CR or level, rounded up, divided by total CRs or levels also rounded up. Four level 8 PCs and eight CR 1/4 conjured wolves will result in PCs losing out on 20% of total XP, but four level 8 PCs and one conjured CR 2 Giant Constrictor Snake will only cost them about 6% of their XP, making the higher-CR Conjure Animal options more relatively attractive for tough-but-not-deadly fights.)

Without this XP tweak, purchased mastiffs would be overpowered, and Beastmasters-with-a-bonus-action-command would be somewhat overpowered.

[Rukelnikov]

The Beastmaster attack-when-your-pet-takes-the-Attack-Action clause would go away as part of the rewrite--it's no longer needed.

Acknowledged. You'd need to rewrite some of the other features including the level 7 feature.

Net effect is that a level 5 Beastmaster would getting Attack + Extra Attack + Beast Attack at level 5, which seems okay, considering that a level 5 Fighter can get beast attacks also just by purchasing a bunch of mastiffs.

Sounds ok, I'd still just go with revised though.


I should mention that I've started giving summons and hirelings a share of the combat XP, which IMO is the only way to make summoning spells and Animate Dead a situational tactic instead of an obvious go-to tactic. (Your share of the total XP is your CR or level, rounded up, divided by total CRs or levels also rounded up. Four level 8 PCs and eight CR 1/4 conjured wolves will result in PCs losing out on 20% of total XP, but four level 8 PCs and one conjured CR 2 Giant Constrictor Snake will only cost them about 6% of their XP, making the higher-CR Conjure Animal options more relatively attractive for tough-but-not-deadly fights.)

Without this XP tweak, purchased mastiffs would be overpowered, and Beastmasters-with-a-bonus-action-command would be somewhat overpowered.

That's an awesome system! Its elegant and simple enough, and fixed not only that problem, but also a lvl 1 char going with a party of 3 lvl 20s, and becoming lvl 7 in a day. If I don't fully switch to milestone advancement next time I DM, I'll probably borrow that one.

[MeeposFire]

Res(Wis) and Res(Dex) look pretty appealing at Level 12/16 for a Battle Smith once you max Intelligence. You're level 20 saves could look something like +10/+18/+20/+18/+21/+9.

Just so you know you cannot take both Res (wis) and Res (dex) on the same character. You can only take a feat once so you can only take resilient once and that feat is not a feat specified that you can take more than once. So you will have to reduce one of your saves a bit.

[Misterwhisper]

Ok, I finally got some free time, so an analysis.

Let's start at the top and go down.

- D8 HD, ok no problem there, not quite as much as a paladin or ranger, but same as the cleric/druid/rogue, but let's face it this is really just a 3/4 caster they are trying to put in the game with rules that never had 3/4 casters in it, so D8 is about right.

- Light and medium armor and shields.
Like cleric/druid/ranger
Personally I do not think they should get shields but whatever.

- Simple weapons + Crossbows
This was obviously just put there to make sure that people could get the most out of one of their infusions.

- Thieves and tinkers tools, + 1 extra artisan tools.
Fits thematically but a little much honestly.
With a background you can easily start with 5 tool proficiencies, more if you get one from race.

- 2 Skills from well, let's face it what choices you have mean nothing because anyone can get any skill they want from a background.
2 skills i honestly find odd considering they are supposed to be the magical skill guys, but I guess bards already do that.

- Saves of Con + Int
Well that is about the best that any caster would ever want. Main casting stat and the Con for your concentration checks.
Huge bonus there.

Equipment: Who cares? it never really matters what you start with.

CLASS ABILITIES:

Magical Tinkering:
Mostly a ribbon, tinkering based Prestidigitation essentially.


CASTING:
A: "To observers, you
don’t appear to be casting spells in a
conventional way; you look as if you’re
producing wonders through various items"

Gee, I wonder how long it will be before people try to argue that you can't counterspell an artificer because you can't see them casting...
That is a VERY bad sentence to put in the description that is just screaming to be metagamed by powergamers.

B. Also, they get spells starting at level 1, no other non-full caster gets that.


C. Cantrips:
Wait, they are a "1/2" caster that gets cantrips? That is hugely insulting to the Paladins and Rangers out there who never get them.

D. Prepared Spells:
Ok, so they auto know all their spells and pick which ones they want at the end of a long rest like a cleric...
SO at level 2 you can KNOW the same number of spells as a level SEVEN paladin or ranger, on top of cantrips they never get.
ALSO, you get to change them after a short rest.
That better be a small and unimpressive list... oh wait.

E. Int based casting:
Ok, no problem there, the game needed more than just one class who would put intelligence as a priority anyway.

D: Ritual Casting:
Can cast ritual spells you currently know if they are rituals. A small plus but not huge.

SPELL LIST:

Cantrips:
Most of the common wizard cantrips but a few I find odd -
Why do they get Thorn Whip? That does not fit at all to me.
Guidance - ok that one is a little out of place, personally I find it one of the best cantrips in the game.

I also noticed that they do NOT get Booming Blade or GFB.
Why they don't is pretty obvious when you get to level 5.
Also, High elves make great artificers and they would probably just pick it anyway.

1st level:
They get absorb elements but not shield, and cure wounds but not inflict.
They also get sanctuary, while not over powerful I do find it odd how many cleric spells they get.

2nd level:
Heat metal is very nice to have, other than that nothing jumps out... I will get to the new spells in their section.

3rd level:
Dispell, haste, revivify, fly, lots of good choices cherrypicked around other classes.

4th level:
Odd that they would get Private Sanctum, but not magic hut earlier.

5th level:
Nothing too off or out there this level.

LEVEL 2:
Infuse Items:
Essentially you start knowing 3 infusions and can use 2 at a time but not the same one twice.
Basically making magic items for a while.

INFUSIONS:

Boots of winding path:
Just a copied ability from the mystic nomad class.
Kind of like a bonus action disengage that is a teleport.

Enhance Armor/Shield:
Not sure why they put these together considering some people might want to use it on both.
Easy choice for early level defense to keep things simple.
Very nice choice.

Enhance Wand:
Pretty much 2/3 of wand of the war mage, that can apply to any wand.
Considering how easy it is to craft a wand of the war mage depending on your subclass, usually meh.

Enhance Weapon:
Give a weapon +1 to hit/damage
Warlocks have to be a certain subclass, spend an invocation, and can't get it til 3.
This is very good but should have a level requirement.
Forge clerics can do something like it at level 1 but that is also amazingly good for them as well.
It like most others of its type, autoscales at level 12, which nobody else's can do.

Many Handed Pouch:
I can see specific ways this could come in handy depending on the game but not one I would pick at level 2 or anything.

Radiant weapon:
+1 hit and damage
1/SR chance to blind someone who hits you... ok but not great.

Repeating Shot:
Ok this one I have a problem with.
+1 to hit and damage just like enhance weapon.
But it lets you use a hand crossbow with one hand and use the other one for a shield/other weapon/whatever.
CBE with people machine gunning hand crossbows was already VERY powerful and now they can do it while using a shield too.
Nope, that is not cool. That is just mad power gaming munchkinry.

Replicate Magic Item:
How good or bad this is is completely dependent on how much your dm gives out magic items.

Repulsion shield:
Like Radiant Weapon but on a shield... meh.

Resistant Armor:
This an the other enhancements I think should all come with the requirement of a "non-magical item"
Also the idea that force and psychic are on the list i think is a bit much.

Returning Weapon:
Again same as Repeating shot.
There is finally a way to make a thrown weapon worth it and it gets a +1 hit and damage on top.
I would have no problem with this or Repeating Shot, if they also just released a normal magic item with those properties.
The only way to do that otherwise was a Dwarven Thrower, in my opinion the best weapon in the game.

NEW SPELL:

Arcane Weapon:
1d6 damage, concentration, bonus acton for a level 1 spell.
Not bad at all, kind of like their version of hex/hunter's mark
If they get it, it should be added to a few other classes too though.

SUBCLASSES WILL BE AT THE BOTTOM:

Level 3 Tool specialist:
Expertise in tool proficiency...
You could EASILY have 5 - 7 of them at this point, that is crazy powerful.
A rogue has to choose one of their 4 expertise to take in thieves tools if the want it but artificers get it free, and expertise in MANY more as well.
That is too good, especially with a class that also gets guidance.

ASI:
Same as most people so no biggie there.

LEVEL 5:

Arcane Armament:
Why not just call it extra attack, it would make things simpler.
Also, this class is easily powerful enough to not need extra attack.

LEVEL 10:

Right Cantrip for the Job:
Not bad, but by level 10 how often will you ever need to use it.

LEVEL 18:

Spell Storing Item:
Ok, it is level 18 so I know it should be really powerful, but come one.
I can put a buff or whatever spell I want in an item and then use it up to 10 times without having to recharge it.
AND it does not make me lose the spell
AND I do not even have to have it on my list any more
AND It says nothing about concentration...

Long rest: here have 10 cure wounds laying around, have 10 concentration free arcane weapons for the group of whatever element we want, 10 invisibilities on the way.

This needs some limitations cleared up.

LEVEL 20:

Soul of Artifice:
So you can attune up to 6 items all of a sudden.
Kind of seems like this should be spaced out over the class more.
Wait, you ALSO get a +1 to all saves for each one, so you just poof into getting the saves of a paladin as if they had a charisma of 22...
That is crazy.
6 attuned items is not so crazy if spread out, the save bonus on top is too much.


SUBCLASSES:
Here come the issues.

The class is amazing and powerful as is, but now we get subclasses too.

ALCHEMIST:

2 MORE tools, so now you can easily have 7 tool proficiencies ALL with expertise, by level 3...
I guess every other person in the group might as well just have a seat in all tool/kit related activities, you have it all covered.

BONUS SPELLS:
Nothing to write home about, all good to have around for free, speaking of which, Warlocks do not get their patron spells for free, they only get the choice to pick them to take up their small spells known slots, and PHB rangers do not even get bonus spells, that was all added in the "definitely not power creep" subclasses later.

Homonculous:
Essentially an enhanced familiar that is a construct.
- can be healed by a cantrip
- can bonus action help....

hold on...

Free pet that can bonus action help, guidance cantrip, 5 to 7 tool proficiencies all with expertise.

Might as well just tell your dm not to bother ever using checks that require tools use, you are just going to win.

- very easy to bring back if by chance it dies.
- Gains bonuses when you gain proficiency bonuses...
Hold on... are we going to go back and give that to any other class that gets a pet/enhanced familiar.
Nope, that will never happen, because they refuse to reprint the PHB with all the additions and fixes.
Sorry Chain Warlock and Beastmaster Rangers, no new goodies for you, have to play the new stuff if you want the things you should have had.
But again, definitely not power creep.

Alchemical Salve:

Inspiration: who needs a bard when you have the guidance cantrip and magic familiar spit.

Resilience: 2d6 + int THP, really? Almost like double false life 3/day.

Also is it 3/day per homunculus or 3/day for you?
Could you kill the little guy, make a new one and get 3 more?

Alchemical Mastery:
INT to healing and poison/acid damage.
Poison is resisted so much and so few spells, who cares, but acid is not so bad.
+int to acid splash and things is very nice.
Sorry life clerics, keep your +2 to healing, I will take my INT bonus.
Oh, also, multiple free Lesser Restorations just lying around.

Chemical Savant:
Not that bad, resistance to rather rare damage type and immunity to being poisoned is nice.
1 free greater restoration a day is a good boon.


ARCHIVEST:

Tools: See Alchemist.

BONUS SPELLS:
Some very nice choices here, all of which match the theme.
I am not a fan that dissonant whispers is on the list.
I do not think that subclasses should get class specific spells from other classes.

ARTIFICIAL MIND:
Ok this is going to get complicated.

Telepathic advisor: 2 more skills, so now we are up to minimum 4 skills and 5 tools.

Manifest Mind:
So you make a floating, spectral... thing that:
- has darkvision
- flies
- you can share senses with
- can be the starting point of spells that you can cast through it...
Wait. So unlike other familiars who can deliver touch spells, but will die pretty fast.
This thing can float around, is immune to all effects, you can cast any of your spells through it that you want as if it cast them, while using its senses.
Welcome to 3/4 casting from full cover with complete immunity at level 3 up to INT/LR.
Pretty much pick at least one fight that you can just hide and control.

I liked this ability when it was in Shadowrun and they called it a Rigger.

Wait, it gets even worse...

Information Overload:
Float around looking though your invulnerable specter and can now use your action to use an INT save, (the easiest in the game) ability that does 1d8 psychic damage (one of the lest resisted)
AND it give whoever attacks them advantage on their next attack.
hold on, still more
AFTER it has been a successful damage ability you can blow spell levels to essentially smite with it...

If someone created a wizard subclass that had that ability as a capstone, people would question the brokenness of if.

but wait, there is more.

It is not a spell, so sit behind cover and just use this with impunity up to 300 feet away while invisible if you want.
They can't do anything to it, it is immune.
you do not have to be there, you can use its senses
you are not casting a spell so it does not break invisibly or sanctuary or anything else like that.

but wait there is STILL more.

Mind Network

Psychic Damage: Now you can add your INT to damage of your floating, invisible, psychic ball of death.
oh, you can also telepathically communicate across the world or even other planes.

But wait there is STILL STILL more.

Pure Information:

Now when you psychic smite someone they must make an intelligence save or be stunned until the end of your next turn.
So, int save, scaling 1d8 + int damage, can smite, if you smite they have to save or be stunned for at least a turn, can do it from 300 feet away, from cover, and it is immune to effects and abilities...

who the hell made this?

Oh, also you can teleport to your floating death machine or any of your other magic items once for free or with any level 2 spell slot or above...


ARTILERIST:

The remnants of Mike Mearles try to rip off another video game...

Tools and crafting wands: Same as the others, mostly meh.
Wands can be handy to have, there are some good choices on the spell list for them.

Bonus Spells:
Gains the Shield spell, that is nice to have.
The rest are just blasting spells mainly.

Arcane Turret:

Well this just flies in the face of the idea of not liking sci-fi in fantasy settings.
Many people love the ideas of flintlock or similar firearms in their DND and some hate the concept, some at WOTC hate it as well.
So how do we cover this, let's keep firearms as an optional rule in the DMG but go ahead and make a subclass that pulls out a tool box and Team Fort's a walking mechanical gun turret...
I do not see this EVER hitting print but on we go.

1. It takes an action to summon.
That makes sense and works out fine.

2. "Has to be summoned on horizontal surface"
That is just begging to get argued with.
"Sorry, you can't summon your turret, the floor is sloped."
"Can't summon there, it is rough terrain."
Why not just say that you can summon it within 5 feet, why make it complicated and create arguments.

3. It has HP = to 5*your artificer level...
So it has fewer HP than a homunculus?
Why does the walking crab machine that is magical and has an 18 flat AC have less HP than your familiar?

4. AC of 18.
Seems a little high to me, but whatever.
What is it made of?
Can it be targeted by Heat Metal?

5. Immune to poison and psychic damage and all conditions.
Immune to poison and psychic damage, ok, that makes sense.
Immune to ALL conditions?
So it is immune to being prone even though it walks around?
Immune to being grappled? Why?
So you can't knock it over or hold it down for some reason.
Can't be restrained or stunned. Ok no problem, it is a machine.
Technically this also means it can't be invisible.

6. Healed by a cantrip and lasts 10 mins.
Ok. That is fine.
It seems that it is perfectly ok for artificers to just give the finger to everyone else when it comes to healing pets.

7. Bonus action to activate the turret or make it walk 15 feet.
So it can't be summoned on anything but "horizontal surfaces" but it can climb... that is stupid.
It is quite slow, and because it can't be grappled or anything you can't just pick it up and move it yourself if you happen to be strong enough.

8. One free summon and then it costs you a spell slot of any level.
Another artificer feature that you can just hide behind cover and spam out until everything is dead.
I really wish they would stop trying to make video game mechanics shoehorned into tabletop.
Also, i don't care for the idea of just getting the exact same turret whether you spend a level 1 spell or a level 5.

9. Detonate as an action.
Ok, not that big of a deal but then again just a video game mechanic.

10. Turret types:
Flamethrower- a 15 foot cone of 1d8 fire... that's it?
Kind of weak in my opinion but for a bonus action I guess that is ok.

Force Ballista:
Ranged spell attack from the turret, up to 120 feet, that does 2d8 and pushes back 5 feet.
It is like a slightly weaker eldritch blast with a half power repelling blast.
This is much more like it. That is worth a bonus action.

Defender:
a bonus action 1d8 + int THP for it and everyone you want within 10 feet.
Ok, this is kind of nice, makes a great bunker buddy considering you could also just stay behind it and use it for 1/2 cover, or you could use it at the front line to help keep your tanks capped off with THP.

However all of these have a huge flaw that the other 2 subclasses so far can cover but it doesn't.
The others let you use the senses of their summon as your own.
Do you have to be able to see the target of the force ballista?
Also you are using your bonus action to "activate the turret" not to allow it to use its own action so I would think that you are picking a target and using your own spell DC or spell attack, so you have to be able to see it.

Wand Prototype:
You can make a wand that has one of your cantrips in it, which you do not even have to know, and can use that wand with the cantrip to add +INT to the damage of the wand.
This ability is just trying to stick with the theme of wand making for no reason. Just let it say you can add INT to damage of cantrips if you use a wand as a focus if you want it to be wand centered.
Considering that all artificers get 2 attacks the level before you get this, how often are you going to use it anyway?

Fortified Position:
A 10 foot bubble of half cover around your turret?
Nice. Although one of you could already do that by just standing behind it.
You can use 2 turrets at once and activate both as a bonus action.

So my high elf artificer could:
have his shield
wear half plate
have half cover
get THP every round of 1d8+INT
Wield a hand crossbow in one hand and shoot it twice because they don't have to reload
then use his other bonus action to shoot again with a different turret for 2d8
Or just not use the defender and:
Half plate
Heavy crossbow attack x2
magic ballistas x2
at level 14.

That is going to make people who have to pay a lot more for 4 attacks a round rater mad.


BATTLESMITH:

Skills and crafting: same as the others.

Bonus Spells:
Lots of smites, honestly not a big priority for me but some people like them.
The two aura spells are nice to have.

Battle Ready:
You gain marital weapons and can use int to attack and damage for your weapons.
Gaining martial weapons is nice, but honestly it is not that huge of a deal. You already can you a great ranged weapon, spears which are great, and some others.
If you plan to go weapon and shield this is not that big of a deal but much better if you want to use 2 handers.
This is the part I have an issue with but overall not a massive one.
ALL magic weapons?
So Int for your heavy crossbow that autoloads its own magically created bolts, and you can int for damage with your great sword?

There is now an ability for anyone to be able to attack with any stat they want in the game except for con.
The others though all have specified limitations:
Shillelagh has to be a staff or club.
Hexblade has to be certain weapons and costs an invocation if you want more of them.
Finesse is limited to only a few weapons none of which do more than a d8 damage.
Strength is used for many different weapons but if you want to use it at range your weapon types are very limited and are all rather short range.
This though is essentially use any weapon you want and use your casting stat for attack and damage.

This is not needed on a class so stocked already.

IRON DEFENDER:

1. You get a nice pet:
HP: 5*level + your INT + its CON, that is very reasonable
AC of 15, is about right
Speed of 40 is great, never going to have to worry about it keeping up.
Darkvision is great
Immunities and things make sense.
Cant be surprised. That might be going a little far. It is a super watchdog.
Understands all languages that you do.

2. It goes on your initiative but you go first.
Why bother putting this in there? This is just overly complicating things for no reason.

3. The normal artificer pet action/bonus action abilities.

4 Healing: It can heal itself 3/day or you can cantrip heal it. That is a lot of lasting power.

5. It gets a rather basic bite attack. Nothing special.

6. Reaction to give disadvantage on an attack if it is in melee range and targeting someone else.
Makes it a great guard dog.
Doesn't sleep, has dark vision, can't be surprised, and if someone tries to attack you they get disadvantage on the first swing that would have hit.

Arcane Jolt:

Your pet now has a magic bite. Makes sense. It is kind of your thing to make magic items and weapons.

Oncer per turn = to your int mod you can make either one of your attack or your pet's attacks have a mini smite or a mini heal.

The mini smite/heal feels clunky and tacked on to me.

Improved Defender:

Your mini smite/heal gets better.
Ok, it still feels clunky.

Your pet's defensive reaction now comes with free 1d4+int damage.

So you could:

Action:
attack x2 with your heavy crossbow/ hand crossbow and a shield
bonus action:
your pet uses a bite attack
No Action:
If any of those hit you can spend a charge of arcane jolt to do 4d4 more damage
Reaction:
your pet gives someone trying to hit you disadvantage and hits them with 1d4+ int damage.


It seems like they should just:

1. nerf the crap out of archivest

2. get rid of artillerist completely

4. Drop the pet from Battle Smith and just make another subclass that is all about having a great mechanical pet.

5. Go back and give other classes with pets updated abilities

6. Simplify the wording and spread out a lot of this.

7. Put the gunsmith back, lots of fans liked it.

[Wildarm]

Not really, besides the janktastic mount rules.
It's not a terrible combo, though. With some Cavalier levels, for easy modifications to your strategy, higher HP pool, better armor and eventual Mounted Combatant feat, it'd be a good strategy. Just keep in mind that the default Artificer companion is designed to take hits for you, and riding it will basically reverse the roles. And the default Artificer is about as tanky as a Druid.

I looked a bit at leaning heavy into the mounted combatant route for Battle Smith but it just doesn't work that well with a medium size mount. You only get advantage on small creatures. Possibly useful to cast enlarge on your robo-dog but I don't like having to spend resources and concentration to make a feat fully functional.

[jaappleton]

SNIP

See? THIS is constructive.

No hard feelings about earlier, Mist.

[Misterwhisper]

See? THIS is constructive.

No hard feelings about earlier, Mist.

No problems, I am a very negative person.

[Misterwhisper]

Remember you can only use this cast from your MAM's space Int Mod times per day. But yes, it can be pretty broken with heat metal in particular. It would break invisibility or sanctuary. An ability that forces a save or makes an attack roll generally does.

Overload is not a spell.

You can do it as much as you want.

You could hide outside a fort or dungeon Or whatever and go kill the whole place if they are within 300 feet. After you clear a level or area just stay invis or hidden and move up and repeat.

[Wildarm]

Overload is not a spell.

You can do it as much as you want.

You could hide outside a fort or dungeon Or whatever and go kill the whole place if they are within 300 feet. After you clear a level or area just stay invis or hidden and move up and repeat.

Yeah, re-reading it I realized that and deleted the post. Only option is for the enemies to keep 35' away from it. Possible but janky for sure. Unsure how to make it better. Perhaps have the mind wink out after using information overload or casting a spell through it? You can re-summon as a bonus action to somewhere with 60' so it would not break the fundamental use of the feature at closer ranges but we curb some of the long range abuse. Also means you would have to come out of full cover to have LOS on a new spot to summon it.

As a DM I would have it break sanctuary or Invisibility though. Are you targeting or damaging a creature? Lose your protection.

[Makorel]

Manifest Mind:
So you make a floating, spectral... thing that:
- has darkvision
- flies
- you can share senses with
- can be the starting point of spells that you can cast through it...
Wait. So unlike other familiars who can deliver touch spells, but will die pretty fast.
This thing can float around, is immune to all effects, you can cast any of your spells through it that you want as if it cast them, while using its senses.
Welcome to 3/4 casting from full cover with complete immunity at level 3 up to INT/LR.
Pretty much pick at least one fight that you can just hide and control.


Wow I hadn't even considered this. I mean in my experience spellcasters rarely get hit so long as they stay in the back line but it's still technically possible.

[AdAstra]

Careful with that Max, if you switch it to bonus action, by lvl 5 you'd be doing 4 attacks a round, Action = Att + Extra Attack, BA = Beast Attack + Beastmaster extra attack when pet attacks. Also, the class was written with an Action to command the beast in mind, the lvl 7 feature would become redundant, and the lvl 11 feature would allow 3 ranger + 2 pet attacks per round.

IMO, even if you don't use revised ranger, revised Beastmaster does everything as it should have been in the first place.



Storm Sorcerer get exactly that at lvl 14, and enemies must also save or be pushed away, there probably some other one around.



I don't get this, if its next to an enemy i'm attacking that good enough for SA, isn't it?

***************

Regarding the Iron guardian, I see a lot of people saying its like beastmasters pet but better or that BS has 2 subclasses, but is it? Lets compare its stats to the Giant Constrictor Snake, which seems to be referenced pretty frequently when BM comes up:


Iron Guardian

AC = 15
HP = 5*lvl + Int + IG's Con(+2)
Att = 2+Prof
Dam = 1d8+Prof


Giant Constrictor Snake

AC = 14+Prof
HP = 4*lvl
Att = 6+Prof, 10 ft reach
Dam = 1d4+4+Prof, +3d6 save for half



The IG has notably better HP(1*lvl+Int+IG Con), but AC is better for this pet, and attck and damage are basically incomparable.

Granted the IG can attack as a bonus action, but franly, at which point does it stop being useful to spend your BA for a low damage attack with a low chance to hit? My guess is... pretty fast. Arcane Jolt can keep IG's attack relevant a bit longer, but it can only be triggered once per round, so if you hit with your attack, no need to spend BA on IG. Defensive Pounce is its defining feature IMO, it stays strong all the way, and becomes even stronger later on. Immunity to surprised is good, but if you are surprised you cant spend you BA to command it, so it becomes somewhat moot, only for OAs.



This is true though, its awfully expendable, as long as you win the encounter you can revive it to full for just a 1st lvl slot, and if it didn't die, you don't even spend a 1st lvl slot...

OTOH, what reason does an enemy have for attacking it? its damage will be way below the rest of the party (in 99% of cases), and if it uses its reaction on OAs then its not doing Defensive Pounce, most enemies won't know this though, so they should treat it as threat, but after second round they may pick up to it.

IDK, I think its good, but nowhere as good as a Chain Familiar, and we've already been comparing Locks to BSs for some reason, so I think its pretty ok.


In combat, the iron defender shares your
initiative count, but it takes its turn immediately
after yours.

Its turn comes after yours. Thus, when approaching an enemy, you would get there first and have to take your turn before it does. You could ready your action to attack, but then you'd lose out on Extra Attack and other reactions you could take instead.

EDIT: I'd like to clarify it does work, it's just not ideal if you and the Iron Defender are not already adjacent to the target.

[Damon_Tor]

I think the best use for the iron defender is just as a mantlet, portable cover for the alchemist. The defender uses dodge automatically every round so isn't likely to take any damage itself, while it's also giving you +5 ac for 3/4 cover. It further protects you with it's reaction. Meanwhile you're sitting there shooting your 2d6 handcrossbow 3 times a turn with your shield in your other hand. You are the tankiest freaking Archer in the game.

Interesting note: the fact that the defender always takes its turn after yours has a specific and exploitable effect. It means that when your turn rolls around, if your defender hasn't used it's reaction yet you can feel good about creating a situation where it might do so, provoking an opportunity attack from a creature adjacent to the defender for example, because as soon as your turn ends the defender will regain the reaction.

[AdAstra]

I think the best use for the iron defender is just as a mantlet, portable cover for the alchemist. The defender uses dodge automatically every round so isn't likely to take any damage itself, while it's also giving you +5 ac for 3/4 cover. It further protects you with it's reaction. Meanwhile you're sitting there shooting your 2d6 handcrossbow 3 times a turn with your shield in your other hand. You are the tankiest freaking Archer in the game.

Interesting note: the fact that the defender always takes its turn after yours has a specific and exploitable effect. It means that when your turn rolls around, if your defender hasn't used it's reaction yet you can feel good about creating a situation where it might do so, provoking an opportunity attack from a creature adjacent to the defender for example, because as soon as your turn ends the defender will regain the reaction.

I think this one may not work without warcaster or a ruby of the war mage since you wouldn't have any hands free to perform the somatic components. Not a major cost, especially considering the artificer's extra attunement slots and benefits from having attuned items, but something to note

Also it may be a bit of a reach to assume that a medium quadruped would give a character 3/4 cover. Maybe if the alchemist was small, but I'm pretty sure most DMs would allow 1/2 cover at most, use movement to flank the defender, or both.

[GlenSmash!]

...snipped very good analysis...

Oh this is good stuff. I look forward to your breakdown of the other 2 subclasses.

[Wildarm]

Interesting note: the fact that the defender always takes its turn after yours has a specific and exploitable effect. It means that when your turn rolls around, if your defender hasn't used it's reaction yet you can feel good about creating a situation where it might do so, provoking an opportunity attack from a creature adjacent to the defender for example, because as soon as your turn ends the defender will regain the reaction.

Hmmm Interesting tactic for psuedo mobility feat. Start of your turn, IG is adjacent to enemy. Your move, come next to enemy and IG, attack w/ Booming Blade, then retreat drawing an AO at disadvantage from IG reaction. After your turn IG attacks and then retreats back to your new position. Enemy had already used his reaction and will take additional damage if it pursues next turn. I like it. If you've got 20+ AC you're unlikely to be hit with a AO at disadvantage.

[Damon_Tor]

I think this one may not work without warcaster or a ruby of the war mage since you wouldn't have any hands free to perform the somatic components. Not a major cost, especially considering the artificer's extra attunement slots and benefits from having attuned items, but something to note

It appears the Artificer always requires material components for all his spells regardless of whether or not the spell in question normally requires them:


You produce your artificer spell effects through your tools. You must have a spellcasting focus—specifically thieves’ tools or some kind of artisan’s tool—in hand when you cast any spell with this Spellcasting feature. You must be proficient with the tool to use it in this way. See chapter 5, “Equipment,” in the Player’s Handbook for descriptions of these tools. After you gain the Infuse Item feature at 2nd level, you can also use any item bearing one of your infusions as a spellcasting focus.

Emphasis mine.

What this means is as long as he's holding an infused item (ie, his crossbow or his shield) he never needs a free hand for casting because the weapon or shield functions as his material component, without the problems other gishy casters have with somatic non-material spells.


Also it may be a bit of a reach to assume that a medium quadruped would give a character 3/4 cover. Maybe if the alchemist was small, but I'm pretty sure most DMs would allow 1/2 cover at most, use movement to flank the defender, or both.

Obviously rule zero is always in effect. But it's a bit silly to think that a normal sized human being couldn't obscure 3/4 of his body behind a black bear assuming the black bear was willing to allow it.

https://www.tokeofthetown.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/bear20hugging20man.jpeg

But yes, I think it's fair to say that the artificer is likely to be small. There are simply too many reasons to be a Gnome.

[Damon_Tor]

Hmmm Interesting tactic for psuedo mobility feat. Start of your turn, IG is adjacent to enemy. Your move, come next to enemy and IG, attack w/ Booming Blade, then retreat drawing an AO at disadvantage from IG reaction. After your turn IG attacks and then retreats back to your new position. Enemy had already used his reaction and will take additional damage if it pursues next turn. I like it. If you've got 20+ AC you're unlikely to be hit with a AO at disadvantage.

And starting at level 14, the other guy will take unavoidable damage when the ID takes his reaction. It's a whole bunch of catch 22s stacked on top of each other. It's like a catch 66 or something.

[AdAstra]

D. Prepared Spells:
Ok, so they auto know all their spells and pick which ones they want at the end of a long rest like a cleric...
SO at level 2 you can KNOW the same number of spells as a level SEVEN paladin or ranger, on top of cantrips they never get.
ALSO, you get to change them after a short rest.
That better be a small and unimpressive list... oh wait.



Okay, most of this is very good, if perhaps lacking in rigor, but eh, it's been out for less than a week. This part however, seems just...wrong? Artificers get to prepare spells equal to half their class level + their INT, which at lvl 2 should be 4? That's exactly the same as a Paladin, and both get the same number of "domain" spells, so this evaluation seems just incorrect? Plus I have no idea where you got the thing about changing spells prepared on a short rest, either?

EDIT: Oh wait, realized you were talking about the cantrips and spells known, my bad. Still, the extra spells known remain bottlenecked by only being able to prepare as many as a paladin, and they, along with the cantrips, fit well with the goal of a 2/3 caster.

EDIT AGAIN(I'm so sorry): Ok checking again the math on spells known still doesn't make sense. An Artificer at level 2 can prepare from a list of 17 lvl 1 spells and knows 2 cantrips. A lvl 7 paladin can prepare from a list of 19 spells, PLUS always having 4 spells from their oath known and prepared at all times, AND they can prepare 5-7 more of the base 19, vs the Artificer's 4+2 cantrips. At equal levels Artificers prepare as many spells as paladins plus cantrips, which seems perfectly fair for a more castery class

I think my main issue so far is that Battlesmith and Archivist hew too close to being 1/2 martial, 2/3 caster, if that makes sense. Especially Battlesmith, though the concept is really fun.

[Rukelnikov]

CASTING:
A: "To observers, you
don’t appear to be casting spells in a
conventional way; you look as if you’re
producing wonders through various items"

Gee, I wonder how long it will be before people try to argue that you can't counterspell an artificer because you can't see them casting...
That is a VERY bad sentence to put in the description that is just screaming to be metagamed by powergamers.

Very true.


C. Cantrips:
Wait, they are a "1/2" caster that gets cantrips? That is hugely insulting to the Paladins and Rangers out there who never get them.

Meh, 1/3rd casters also get cantrips, so the "insult", if there was one to begin with, was already there.


D. Prepared Spells:
Ok, so they auto know all their spells and pick which ones they want at the end of a long rest like a cleric...
SO at level 2 you can KNOW the same number of spells as a level SEVEN paladin or ranger, on top of cantrips they never get.
ALSO, you get to change them after a short rest.
That better be a small and unimpressive list... oh wait.

Paladins also get all of their list. Its the Rangers taht are stuck with spells known.


LEVEL 2:
Infuse Items:
[...]
Enhance Armor/Shield:
Not sure why they put these together considering some people might want to use it on both.
Easy choice for early level defense to keep things simple.
Very nice choice.

I guess they are together so they can't both be used at once, its already very good as it is, it would be stupid good at lvl 2 otherwise.


Repeating Shot:
Ok this one I have a problem with.
+1 to hit and damage just like enhance weapon.
But it lets you use a hand crossbow with one hand and use the other one for a shield/other weapon/whatever.
CBE with people machine gunning hand crossbows was already VERY powerful and now they can do it while using a shield too.
Nope, that is not cool. That is just mad power gaming munchkinry.

Its very good indeed, but take into account that it basically giving +2 armor only to a specific build, and requires attunement, at lvl 20 that wouldn't be a problem, rest of the game it will.


Resistant Armor:
This an the other enhancements I think should all come with the requirement of a "non-magical item"
Also the idea that force and psychic are on the list i think is a bit much.

You would really spend an attunement on resistance to 1 element, when you could have bonus to AC without consuming an attument? TBH I think this is borderline bad.



NEW SPELL:

Arcane Weapon:
1d6 damage, concentration, bonus acton for a level 1 spell.
Not bad at all, kind of like their version of hex/hunter's mark
If they get it, it should be added to a few other classes too though.

Why? As you said, its their version of Hex/Hunter's Mark, and those are also exclusives(Vengadins get HM though).


Level 3 Tool specialist:
Expertise in tool proficiency...
You could EASILY have 5 - 7 of them at this point, that is crazy powerful.
A rogue has to choose one of their 4 expertise to take in thieves tools if the want it but artificers get it free, and expertise in MANY more as well.
That is too good, especially with a class that also gets guidance.

Agreed, I think its ok for them to be the tool masters, its a niche that wasn't covered and fits the theme, but this is too much too soon, and frankly, quite lazy.


Arcane Armament:
Why not just call it extra attack, it would make things simpler.
Also, this class is easily powerful enough to not need extra attack.

They could've just put Extra Attack on it tbh, 90%+ of artificers planning to take the attack action on a regular basis will be equiped with magic weapons. However I don't think this class is powerful enough to not need Extra Attack, but they could've maybe gotten it a bit later. IMO this class is pretty good early on, and pretty meh from lvls 10 to 19.


Soul of Artifice:
So you can attune up to 6 items all of a sudden.
Kind of seems like this should be spaced out over the class more.
Wait, you ALSO get a +1 to all saves for each one, so you just poof into getting the saves of a paladin as if they had a charisma of 22...
That is crazy.
6 attuned items is not so crazy if spread out, the save bonus on top is too much.

Agreed, this is easily the best capstone in the game, and likely the best class feature in the game bar spellcasting.

It would still be the best capstone in the game if it was "just" attunement to 6 items, and a potent one if it was +1 to saves for each attuned item.

Both things at once is retardedly good.



BONUS SPELLS:
Nothing to write home about, all good to have around for free, speaking of which, Warlocks do not get their patron spells for free, they only get the choice to pick them to take up their small spells known slots, and PHB rangers do not even get bonus spells, that was all added in the "definitely not power creep" subclasses later.

You can't make the spells cost them something since they know their full list like Clerics, Druids and Paladins, IMO the problem here was that they didn't give Locks at least 1 patron's spell of each lvl for free.


Homonculous:
snip

Sorry Chain Warlock and Beastmaster Rangers, no new goodies for you, have to play the new stuff if you want the things you should have had.
But again, definitely not power creep.

snip

Sorry, but no, Chain Familiar is still far better, Homunculus has a list of choices for what it can do with its action, which means, essentially, that you cannot give it a Wand of MM for a 8d4+8 nuke as a free action or a Rings of Spell Storing to have it mantain concentration on Hypnotic Pattern/Darkness for you, basically having a secondary caster pet, or have it ready an action to activate a Cube of Force when a ranged attack or spell is incoming. Those are all things my Imp actually did, and nothing the Homunuculus has comes even close. Detailed list of possible actions to take is a severe crippler.

I see the same trend here as the rest of the class (sans capstone), very good at early levels, very meh after lvl 10.



Also is it 3/day per homunculus or 3/day for you?
Could you kill the little guy, make a new one and get 3 more?

This is a valid question, however I think its all there, if you revive it as an action spending a slot, its the same Homunculus, hence "revive", and so any resources it has already spent reamin spent. If you create one after a long rest though, that is a new one and thus has its resources fresh.

The real question is, do I get an arbitrarily high ammount of homunculi with this feature?

"Whenever you finish a long rest and your alchemist's supplies are with you, you can form this homunculus in an unoccupied space within 5 feet of you. If you already have a homunculus from this feature, the first one immediately dies."

"If the mending spell is cast on it, it regains 2d6 hit points. If it has died within the last hour, you can use your alchemist's supplies as an action to revive it, provided you are within 5 feet of it and you expend a spell slot of 1st level or higher. The homunculus returns to life with all its hit points restored."

Intent obviously has to be "NO", but RAW you can make a second one and revive the first one right after. They should have added a line that went "You can only ever have a single Homunculus from this feature"


ARTIFICIAL MIND:
Ok this is going to get complicated.

snip

This one is likely the best of all "familiars", however it's tailor made for a caster, and as a damage dealing caster, Artificers are no good, too few slots, get higher level spell too late, it can probably work very well as a dip for a full caster, since some of its abilities are very good, casting from the AM is the best one IMO, and you get it at three so you can get that and still get Wish.

Information Overload gets good at 14th, once you get Mind Overload, so you can conditionally turn low lvl slots into "save or stun". Before that its a nice cantrip since it targets a usually poor save and deals a rarely resisted type of damage, but the option to add extra damage to it is rarely good. Contrary to smite, you can only use this once a turn, so you can't nova with it, and a 3rd lvl slot for instance, can generally be used for something better than 3d8 damage.

[Misterwhisper]

Very true.



Meh, 1/3rd casters also get cantrips, so the "insult", if there was one to begin with, was already there.



Paladins also get all of their list. Its the Rangers taht are stuck with spells known.



I guess they are together so they can't both be used at once, its already very good as it is, it would be stupid good at lvl 2 otherwise.



Its very good indeed, but take into account that it basically giving +2 armor only to a specific build, and requires attunement, at lvl 20 that wouldn't be a problem, rest of the game it will.



You would really spend an attunement on resistance to 1 element, when you could have bonus to AC without consuming an attument? TBH I think this is borderline bad.



Why? As you said, its their version of Hex/Hunter's Mark, and those are also exclusives(Vengadins get HM though).



Agreed, I think its ok for them to be the tool masters, its a niche that wasn't covered and fits the theme, but this is too much too soon, and frankly, quite lazy.



They could've just put Extra Attack on it tbh, 90%+ of artificers planning to take the attack action on a regular basis will be equiped with magic weapons. However I don't think this class is powerful enough to not need Extra Attack, but they could've maybe gotten it a bit later. IMO this class is pretty good early on, and pretty meh from lvls 10 to 19.



Agreed, this is easily the best capstone in the game, and likely the best class feature in the game bar spellcasting.

It would still be the best capstone in the game if it was "just" attunement to 6 items, and a potent one if it was +1 to saves for each attuned item.

Both things at once is retardedly good.




You can't make the spells cost them something since they know their full list like Clerics, Druids and Paladins, IMO the problem here was that they didn't give Locks at least 1 patron's spell of each lvl for free.



Sorry, but no, Chain Familiar is still far better, Homunculus has a list of choices for what it can do with its action, which means, essentially, that you cannot give it a Wand of MM for a 8d4+8 nuke as a free action or a Rings of Spell Storing to have it mantain concentration on Hypnotic Pattern/Darkness for you, basically having a secondary caster pet, or have it ready an action to activate a Cube of Force when a ranged attack or spell is incoming. Those are all things my Imp actually did, and nothing the Homunuculus has comes even close. Detailed list of possible actions to take is a severe crippler.

I see the same trend here as the rest of the class (sans capstone), very good at early levels, very meh after lvl 10.




This is a valid question, however I think its all there, if you revive it as an action spending a slot, its the same Homunculus, hence "revive", and so any resources it has already spent reamin spent. If you create one after a long rest though, that is a new one and thus has its resources fresh.

The real question is, do I get an arbitrarily high ammount of homunculi with this feature?

"Whenever you finish a long rest and your alchemist's supplies are with you, you can form this homunculus in an unoccupied space within 5 feet of you. If you already have a homunculus from this feature, the first one immediately dies."

"If the mending spell is cast on it, it regains 2d6 hit points. If it has died within the last hour, you can use your alchemist's supplies as an action to revive it, provided you are within 5 feet of it and you expend a spell slot of 1st level or higher. The homunculus returns to life with all its hit points restored."

Intent obviously has to be "NO", but RAW you can make a second one and revive the first one right after. They should have added a line that went "You can only ever have a single Homunculus from this feature"



This one is likely the best of all "familiars", however it's tailor made for a caster, and as a damage dealing caster, Artificers are no good, too few slots, get higher level spell too late, it can probably work very well as a dip for a full caster, since some of its abilities are very good, casting from the AM is the best one IMO, and you get it at three so you can get that and still get Wish.

Information Overload gets good at 14th, once you get Mind Overload, so you can conditionally turn low lvl slots into "save or stun". Before that its a nice cantrip since it targets a usually poor save and deals a rarely resisted type of damage, but the option to add extra damage to it is rarely good. Contrary to smite, you can only use this once a turn, so you can't nova with it, and a 3rd lvl slot for instance, can generally be used for something better than 3d8 damage.

The issue with information overload is not the damage which is still pretty good, it is that you do not even have to be there.

You could be in a locked and barred up room 200 feet away and just using the senses of you invulnerable flying symbol to float around and psychic blast things to death with impunity.

Int save which is probably the worst save in the game for most enemies.

Psychic damage which is one of the least resisted.

Can smite with it if you really need to.

Int to damage at level 6 so now it is save or 2d8 + int damage

Later if you smite they also int save or get stunned for a turn at least.

Also it is not a spell to manifest or use so you:
Can’t dispel
Can’t counterspell
Don’t get a bonus on the save if you have resistance to spells
Works in an anti magic zone
It is not even concentration
It also does not even say you lose your sense to use its senses.

Also come to think of it, there is nothing about you that links you to it.

Manifest it and have it go kill someone, how would anyone ever know who did it without getting lucky and using spells directly on you.

It is psychic so no physical marks
Not a spell so no residual magic to detect
No physical items or evidence to leave behind

All you have to do is be within 300 feet.

[Rukelnikov]

The issue with information overload is not the damage which is still pretty good, it is that you do not even have to be there.

You could be in a locked and barred up room 200 feet away and just using the senses of you invulnerable flying symbol to float around and psychic blast things to death with impunity.

Definitely, this is the best feature of the AI.


Int save which is probably the worst save in the game for most enemies.

Psychic damage which is one of the least resisted.

Can smite with it if you really need to.

Int to damage at level 6 so now it is save or 2d8 + int damage

Yeah, but still, before lvl 14 I see smiting with it as a rare clutch, since you generally have better things to do with your slots. I'm not saying its bad, its pretty good, just not OP or close to it.


Later if you smite they also int save or get stunned for a turn at least.

This is pretty good indeed, since you turn 1st lvl slots into save or stuns and thats really good


Also it is not a spell to manifest or use so you:
Can’t dispel
Can’t counterspell
Don’t get a bonus on the save if you have resistance to spells
Works in an anti magic zone

Not being a spell has its good share of bonuses, but It doesn't work in an AMF

"Information Overload. As an action while the item is on your person, you can try to magically overload"

Take into account it also cant be Quickened or Twinned.

Do you really think its better than a Sorlock spamming Eldritch Blasts from Darkness?

EDIT:


It is not even concentration
It also does not even say you lose your sense to use its senses.

It is concentration and you lose your senses: "As an action, you can hear and see using the mind’s senses, instead of your own, until your concentration ends (as if concentrating on a spell)"


Also come to think of it, there is nothing about you that links you to it.

Manifest it and have it go kill someone, how would anyone ever know who did it without getting lucky and using spells directly on you.

Yup, remote controlled killing machine is the best feature.


It is psychic so no physical marks
Not a spell so no residual magic to detect
No physical items or evidence to leave behind

All you have to do is be within 300 feet.

Information Overload is magical though.

[jaappleton]

As far as IO, with the 'Smite' ability:

Doesn't the target make an Int save?

.....meaning unlike Smite, its impossible to Crit?

[Fnissalot]

While I agree with some stuff, here are some general comments I have on the rest. The quotes are cut down to focus on what I discuss.



- 2 Skills from well, let's face it what choices you have mean nothing because anyone can get any skill they want from a background.
2 skills i honestly find odd considering they are supposed to be the magical skill guys, but I guess bards already do that.

I never thought artificers as skill guys; they are practical, not theoretical. They study engineering while a wizard sits in their library.


Why do they get Thorn Whip? That does not fit at all to me.

Thorn whip is mechanically a hookshot. Flavour it as one and you will be fine! This is why things like this section is here:
"To observers, you
don’t appear to be casting spells in a
conventional way; you look as if you’re
producing wonders through various items"


Repeating Shot:
But it lets you use a hand crossbow with one hand and use the other one for a shield/other weapon/whatever.
CBE with people machine gunning hand crossbows was already VERY powerful and now they can do it while using a shield too.
Nope, that is not cool. That is just mad power gaming munchkinry.

Returning Weapon:
There is finally a way to make a thrown weapon worth it and it gets a +1 hit and damage on top.
I would have no problem with this or Repeating Shot, if they also just released a normal magic item with those properties.
The only way to do that otherwise was a Dwarven Thrower, in my opinion the best weapon in the game.

I agree that the crossbow feat is stupid and should be changed. Most of the extra attack feats are crazy strong on earlier levels and the -5/+10 feats are broken as well. The problem here is not this item, it is the feat. That said, a repeating crossbow feels so much like an artificer thing to have and you can obviously give these as normal magic items if you GM. Also, thrown weapons are stupidly bad for every martial class that isn't a rogue in 5e, I am ok with this buff.


Arcane Armament:
Why not just call it extra attack, it would make things simpler.
Also, this class is easily powerful enough to not need extra attack.

This is purely a thematic thing in how it is written, if you want to do weapon attacks, you will have a magical weapon, if you don't want to, you won't. Either way, you do not really care.


- very easy to bring back if by chance it dies.
- Gains bonuses when you gain proficiency bonuses...
Hold on... are we going to go back and give that to any other class that gets a pet/enhanced familiar.
Nope, that will never happen, because they refuse to reprint the PHB with all the additions and fixes.
Sorry Chain Warlock and Beastmaster Rangers, no new goodies for you, have to play the new stuff if you want the things you should have had.

Yeah, beastmaster is in a bad spot compared to this and Battle smith, and it is sad that we probably won't see an official fix for this. Making it that easy to get back also makes it less like something you care about and would protect.


So, int save, scaling 1d8 + int damage, can smite, if you smite they have to save or be stunned for at least a turn, can do it from 300 feet away, from cover, and it is immune to effects and abilities...

Yes, the archivists cantrip-like thing is stupid and should be nerfed. Having ranged smites that are on par/better than paladins are silly.

A bad thing, according to me, is how the artificer steps on the rangers overall and archivist steps on the paladin as a smiter. I am ok with it being a new type of half/caster and having extra attack, its spells are mostly support and utility spells anyway. I haven't crunched the numbers but paladins should still be a better damage dealer than the non-archivist artificers. Rangers is a whole other issue. Arcane weapon is a better hunter's mark in most cases since it is on the weapon and not the target and that was pretty much the only thing rangers had going for them. 3 of the 4 subclasses have equal or better choices for animal companions than animal companions are. Why play a paladin over an archivist and why play a ranger over any artificer? If they cannot answer that question, it is bad design according to me.

[Rukelnikov]

As far as IO, with the 'Smite' ability:

Doesn't the target make an Int save?

.....meaning unlike Smite, its impossible to Crit?

Yup, and you can only use it once per turn, well two with AS, the benefit over casting a normal spell is that when you spend the slot the damage is guaranteed since you decide to do it once the target has already failed the save. However, there are normally better uses for Nth lvl slots than dealing Nd8 damage.

[Fnissalot]

As far as IO, with the 'Smite' ability:

Doesn't the target make an Int save?

.....meaning unlike Smite, its impossible to Crit?
That is a solid point! It shouldn't be able to go bananas.

But even if so is the case, the issue in my eyes is that you cannot waste a spell slot on a smite since you choose to do it after it has been hit or failed the save. Even if the damage is only 2d8 for a lvl 1 spell slot, that is more damage than a spell slot that would miss half the time. Would you rather spend a spell slot for catapult for 3d8 if it hits or information overload for 1d8 if it hits and then spend a spell slot for 2d8? Information overload also scales as you level up without increasing the cost for it. It is just better than a catapult.

[Tetrasodium]

But yes, I think it's fair to say that the artificer is likely to be small. There are simply too many reasons to be a Gnome.

Sure, looking only at FR races gives gnomes probably the closest fit for an artificer, but the artificer only started to get positive reviews once they quit trying to design it for lantan. With that said, eberron has many races that do not exist in FR. Of those.. mark of making human, Mark of warding dwarf, changelings, fernian tiefling, kythri tiefling, an ok semi-refluffed warforged with a dragon head called dragonforged to appease FR fans, aberrant elf/gnome/human, also potentially warforged & a few others that give a choice of stat bonus. All of those races bring a set of very tempting toys to the table & the dragonmarked ones can get both another point of int as well as as some additional toys related to their mark.

There are plenty of medium sized races that could do well as an artificer & among the eberron races there are a bunch that do nothing for int but have abilities that could be very tempting with certain artificer builds giving plenty of reasons to be something other than a gnome

[Rukelnikov]

Sure, looking only at FR races gives gnomes probably the closest fit for an artificer, but the artificer only started to get positive reviews once they quit trying to design it for lantan. With that said, eberron has many races that do not exist in FR. Of those.. mark of making human, Mark of warding dwarf, changelings, fernian tiefling, kythri tiefling, an ok semi-refluffed warforged with a dragon head called dragonforged to appease FR fans, aberrant elf/gnome/human, also potentially warforged & a few others that give a choice of stat bonus. All of those races bring a set of very tempting toys to the table & the dragonmarked ones can get both another point of int as well as as some additional toys related to their mark.

There are plenty of medium sized races that could do well as an artificer & among the eberron races there are a bunch that do nothing for int but have abilities that could be very tempting with certain artificer builds giving plenty of reasons to be something other than a gnome

But thing is pet is medium sized, so to ride it you gotta be small, and gnomes are the only small +Int race. Of course you could play a Loxodon artificer and it will work, but it kinda seems like small races get the best deal with the pet.

[Man_Over_Game]

It might be an unpopular opinion, but I think the Artificer should have racial limitations, just like how the Bladesinger and Battlerager do. It makes a lot more sense, to me, to require Gnomish Artificers than it does Dwarvish Battleragers.

And for those who don't like the restriction...remove it! Just like you would with the other classes. Gnomes don't have a strong identity, and I think making the Artificer a Gnome-specific class would really help with that.

[Ventruenox]

Something I noticed about the wording of Manifest Mind. It's size remains tiny, but there is no restriction to the number of appearances that any given Artificial Mind (even the same Artificial Mind) can take. Sure it takes a bonus action to dismiss and another to reappear, but one interpretation can be to change it up every couple of rounds. This could be played like you GOTTA CATCH 'EM ALL.

[Rukelnikov]

It might be an unpopular opinion, but I think the Artificer should have racial limitations, just like how the Bladesinger and Battlerager do. It makes a lot more sense, to me, to require Gnomish Artificers than it does Dwarvish Battleragers.

And for those who don't like the restriction...remove it! Just like you would with the other classes. Gnomes don't have a strong identity, and I think making the Artificer a Gnome-specific class would really help with that.

I don't think its entirely wrong, but the other cases are subclasses, and here you are gating a whole class, maybe gate just a couple of the subclasses like in the other cases?

[Man_Over_Game]

I don't think its entirely wrong, but the other cases are subclasses, and here you are gating a whole class, maybe gate just a couple of the subclasses like in the other cases?

That's a very valid point. I wouldn't even know what Artificer subclass is more "Gnome" than any other. Artillerist, probably. Gnomes love to blow stuff up. One of them having a "giant" turret and some otherworldly knowledge of technology is exactly what I think of as a classic Gnome trope.

I don't foresee the Battle Smith or the Archivist seeing real play. They feel like generic half-casters, not like actual Artificers. The Alchemist and Artillerist are people who make stuff, but the Archivist and the Battle Smith are people who do stuff.

[Anderlith]

That's a very valid point. I wouldn't even know what Artificer subclass is more "Gnome" than any other. Artillerist, probably. Gnomes love to blow stuff up. One of them having a "giant" turret and some otherworldly knowledge of technology is exactly what I think of as a classic Gnome trope.

What about Warforged? My warforged wants kids gosh darn it! Also... ALL of House Cannith would be out of a job...

[Man_Over_Game]

What about Warforged? My warforged wants kids gosh darn it! Also... ALL of House Cannith would be out of a job...

Warforged aren't...kinda(?) AL official...I think. You can use them in Eberron Adventure League, but nowhere else.

Additionally, the classic lore is that Warforged were made by Artificers. Heck, there's a note in the UA that the original Warforged were Archivist pets. I guess they could become self-sufficient, but I think it'd fit more of a trope if someone else was their creator, not their own.

[Makorel]

What about Warforged? My warforged wants kids gosh darn it! Also... ALL of House Cannith would be out of a job...

You might still be SOL since, if you're a Battle Smith, you can make a body but because you're not an Archivist you can't give it a mind. Perhaps you'll need to find a second Artificer who is an Archivist and enter into a mutual contract with them to make new Warforged, with equal ownership between you two. And you can't just go with any Archivist you need to find one you can trust so you'll need to conduct serial interviews with a prospective partner. A good rule of thumb is that you won't know who you can spend many hours together in the workshop with putting nuts and bolts together until the third interview.

[Rukelnikov]

That's a very valid point. I wouldn't even know what Artificer subclass is more "Gnome" than any other. Artillerist, probably. Gnomes love to blow stuff up. One of them having a "giant" turret and some otherworldly knowledge of technology is exactly what I think of as a classic Gnome trope.

I don't foresee the Battle Smith or the Archivist seeing real play. They feel like generic half-casters, not like actual Artificers. The Alchemist and Artillerist are people who make stuff, but the Archivist and the Battle Smith are people who do stuff.

Agreed, the BS feels like a fighter that uses "tech", and the Archivist as a caster that uses "tech". But how much they will feel like an artificer will depend almost entirely on the fluff the player gives to it, since allowing for any infused item to work as a casting focus means if don't wanna do fancy stuff you can just have your infused armor be your casting focus and move on.

[Anderlith]

You might still be SOL since, if you're a Battle Smith, you can make a body but because you're not an Archivist you can't give it a mind. Perhaps you'll need to find a second Artificer who is an Archivist and enter into a mutual contract with them to make new Warforged, with equal ownership between you two. And you can't just go with any Archivist you need to find one you can trust so you'll need to conduct serial interviews with a prospective partner. A good rule of thumb is that you won't know who you can spend many hours together in the workshop with putting nuts and bolts together until the third interview.

A Battlesmith & Archivist Warforged adventure to find one of the lost Creation Forges & become parents

[Rukelnikov]

A Battlesmith & Archivist Warforged adventure to find one of the lost Creation Forges & become parents

Are they also trying to get out of addictions or abussive relationships?

[Anderlith]

Are they also trying to get out of addictions or abussive relationships?

I don’t really see why...
Two Warforged seeking to procreate has enough appeal in & of itself. Plus what would a Warforged be “addicted” too?

[Rukelnikov]

I don’t really see why...
Two Warforged seeking to procreate has enough appeal in & of itself. Plus what would a Warforged be “addicted” too?

It was a joke, in my head it sounded like a movie trailer.

[GlenSmash!]

I find myself wishing for an option got Martial Weapon Proficiency without the Int for weapon attacks thing.

[Man_Over_Game]

I find myself wishing for an option got Martial Weapon Proficiency without the Int for weapon attacks thing.

I think they should have implemented a battle suit Artificer that had this.

I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but you could add firearms to the campaign, grant Artillerists proficiency in them, and replace the word "wand" with "firearm".

[Anderlith]

It was a joke, in my head it sounded like a movie trailer.

This summer, a tale of two lovers, a Warforged soldier, the veteran of a hundred battlefields, a weapon of destruction abandoned & despised after the war, & a lonely Warforged librarian, a slave to the academy which built her, will find each other... but if their dream is to be complete, they must fight, & trust one another, risking it all to find a way to have a child. coming soon, War & Pieces

[GlenSmash!]

I think they should have implemented a battle suit Artificer that had this.

I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but you could add firearms to the campaign, grant Artillerists proficiency in them, and replace the word "wand" with "firearm".

I think I just want someone that can make a Belt of Hill Giant Strength for themselves and actually have a reason to use it.

[Rukelnikov]

This summer, a tale of two lovers, a Warforged soldier, the veteran of a hundred battlefields, a weapon of destruction abandoned & despised after the war, & a lonely Warforged librarian, a slave to the academy which built her, will find each other... but if their dream is to be complete, they must fight, & trust one another, risking it all to find a way to have a child. coming soon, War & Pieces

:smallbiggrin:

[Garfunion]

This summer, a tale of two lovers, a Warforged soldier, the veteran of a hundred battlefields, a weapon of destruction abandoned & despised after the war, & a lonely Warforged librarian, a slave to the academy which built her, will find each other... but if their dream is to be complete, they must fight, & trust one another, risking it all to find a way to have a child. coming soon, War & Pieces
I don’t know why but, “Batteries Not Included” came to mind.

[GlenSmash!]

I don’t know why but, “Batteries Not Included” came to mind.

Love that movie.

[Misterwhisper]

This summer, a tale of two lovers, a Warforged soldier, the veteran of a hundred battlefields, a weapon of destruction abandoned & despised after the war, & a lonely Warforged librarian, a slave to the academy which built her, will find each other... but if their dream is to be complete, they must fight, & trust one another, risking it all to find a way to have a child. coming soon, War & Pieces

I actually had a 5e game that went from 1 to 20 where the entire party were warforged of different classes on a holy mission to build a god for their people.

[Tetrasodium]

It might be an unpopular opinion, but I think the Artificer should have racial limitations, just like how the Bladesinger and Battlerager do. It makes a lot more sense, to me, to require Gnomish Artificers than it does Dwarvish Battleragers.

And for those who don't like the restriction...remove it! Just like you would with the other classes. Gnomes don't have a strong identity, and I think making the Artificer a Gnome-specific class would really help with that.

@Man_Over_Game wtf no... bleep no!! Not everything needs to be exclusively themed to 200% fit into every bit of FR lore. The gnomes of eberron have a distinct identity that is wildly different from FR. They run the library of korranberg (https://eberron.fandom.com/wiki/Library_of_Korranberg), they have House Sivis (https://eberron.fandom.com/wiki/House_Sivis), they are the only ones on khorvaire who know how to bind the elementals to the airships/stormships/lightning rails/etc that. House Cannith builds due to being the ones who are implied to have stolen the method from the drow of xendriik (also nothing like FR drow), and maybe most importantly they have The Trust (https://eberron.fandom.com/wiki/The_Trust) as a not so secret secret secret police force where agents are authorized to preemptively act as judge jury & executioner.

Eberron is a setting with magic treated as a science & almost certainly has public education in addition to a number of colleges & universities. Members of any race in knorvaire could be a skilled artificer



But thing is pet is medium sized, so to ride it you gotta be small, and gnomes are the only small +Int race. Of course you could play a Loxodon artificer and it will work, but it kinda seems like small races get the best deal with the pet.

@Rukelnikov a kobold is small & would actually gain something (pack tactics always active), with the iron defender being medium even mounted combatant would only really help if there were a significant number of tiny/small creatures in a campaign. 5e has very little benefit from riding a mount unless it's faster than you & a 40foot move speed mount is hardly anything to write home about considering a riding horse is 60 & a mastiff/pony is 40 but nothing stops size small creatures from riding a riding horse.


That's a very valid point. I wouldn't even know what Artificer subclass is more "Gnome" than any other. Artillerist, probably. Gnomes love to blow stuff up. One of them having a "giant" turret and some otherworldly knowledge of technology is exactly what I think of as a classic Gnome trope.

I don't foresee the Battle Smith or the Archivist seeing real play. They feel like generic half-casters, not like actual Artificers. The Alchemist and Artillerist are people who make stuff, but the Archivist and the Battle Smith are people who do stuff.

@Man_Over_Game the main continent of focus in eberron (khorvaire) just wrapped up nearly a century of ww1/ww2ish civil war that ended badly & only because one of the six nations blew up from something that basucally turned it into an arcane irradiated wasteland with everyone saying "oh bleep... we didn't do that... who did that! we need to stop and make sure we don't make it worse" while secretly hoping for a way to restart the war on their most favorable terms to seize the victory they were cheated out of. Artificers of khorvaire make well... everything.... the average citizen owns multiple minor magic items & has a decent chance of knowing one or more cantrips. all of the artificers "do stuff" in eberron.




Warforged aren't...kinda(?) AL official...I think. You can use them in Eberron Adventure League, but nowhere else.

Additionally, the classic lore is that Warforged were made by Artificers. Heck, there's a note in the UA that the original Warforged were Archivist pets. I guess they could become self-sufficient, but I think it'd fit more of a trope if someone else was their creator, not their own.

@Man_Over_Game Not really no. House cannith has the dragonmark of making causing them to be much better at making stuff/being artificers than almost anyone else sure... but it's strongly implied that Cannith found the creation forge in xendriik where the giants probably made it. There is also good reason to beliewve that the giants made them for some reason involving the quori invasion that ultimately led to the giants doing something that made The Dragons go full Vorlon & destroy their civilization. House Cannith just figured out how to make it work & it took them a while to get the hang of things. The whole time they were making warforged was iterative improvement/experimenting.

FR based AL likes to pretend that it's the only true d&d, but plenty of games have people playing eberron races in eberron games or custom settings or even non-al following games using published content.






You might still be SOL since, if you're a Battle Smith, you can make a body but because you're not an Archivist you can't give it a mind. Perhaps you'll need to find a second Artificer who is an Archivist and enter into a mutual contract with them to make new Warforged, with equal ownership between you two. And you can't just go with any Archivist you need to find one you can trust so you'll need to conduct serial interviews with a prospective partner. A good rule of thumb is that you won't know who you can spend many hours together in the workshop with putting nuts and bolts together until the third interview.

@Makorel You still need an eldritch machine called a creation forge. It's rumored that cannith is still has one secretly operating one despite being currently forbidden by law from doing so. There is reason to believe that the lord of blades and his followers might have & be operating one deep in the mournland. A warforged is not simply a collection of parts or an advanced construct, they have a soul & spells that require a soul work on them. If you tear the adamantine/mithral plating off a warforged you can't forge it into something else because it will corrode/rust/rot away despite the fact that those metals can not normally do any of those things.

An iron defender is a very far cry from a warforged... they are more dangerous than our civilian security robots (military ones are usually called things like mines & drones), but they really are not much smarter than our security robots (https://www.iflscience.com/technology/security-robot-commits-suicide-in-fountain-because-the-world-is-terrible/).


If some warforged wanted to make a warforged, there are already multiple faiths/cults trying to do that sort of thing (Lord of blades ffollowers & kind of cult of the becoming god)

[Bloodcloud]

It might be an unpopular opinion, but I think the Artificer should have racial limitations, just like how the Bladesinger and Battlerager do. It makes a lot more sense, to me, to require Gnomish Artificers than it does Dwarvish Battleragers.

And for those who don't like the restriction...remove it! Just like you would with the other classes. Gnomes don't have a strong identity, and I think making the Artificer a Gnome-specific class would really help with that.

That would make no sens in eberron, the birth setting of artificers though

[Constructman]

An iron defender is a very far cry from a warforged... they are more dangerous than our civilian security robots (military ones are usually called things like mines & drones), but they really are not much smarter than our security robots (https://www.iflscience.com/technology/security-robot-commits-suicide-in-fountain-because-the-world-is-terrible/).
http://klubbsaga2015.wdfiles.com/local--files/iron-defender/Creature%20-%20Homunculi%2003b%20%28iron%20defender%2001b%29.p ng

Angri doge

[Ventruenox]

Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash?

[Arkhios]

{{Scrubbed}}

[Fnissalot]

I think they should have implemented a battle suit Artificer that had this.

I mentioned it earlier in the thread, but you could add firearms to the campaign, grant Artillerists proficiency in them, and replace the word "wand" with "firearm".

Personally, I would maybe like both. I think an archer that calculates trajectories in their head before shooting and such could use Int for their attacks. At the same time, I think this game overall mechanically overemphasizes SAD builds for people who wants to optimize but that is maybe another discussion.

I agree about the wands/guns and to person who lives in a magical world and have never seen a gun before, they would be the same. I would even go so far in the other direction to call the turret a walking, self-casting wand. For an artillerist, guns and wands are pretty much the same thing.

[NatureKing]

Considering a Paladin 2/Archivist 18. Paladin Wrathful Smite, Hypnotic Pattern, Great Weapon Fighting Style and eventually Radiant Weapon could make a decentish support gish. Finish up with Capstone Spell Storing item. Enhanced Defense and Boots of the Winding Path seem like a decent combination.

Starting at 6th.

Any thoughts?

[Arkhios]

Considering a Paladin 2/Archivist 18. Paladin Wrathful Smite, Hypnotic Pattern, Great Weapon Fighting Style and eventually Radiant Weapon could make a decentish support gish. Finish up with Capstone Spell Storing item. Enhanced Defense and Boots of the Winding Path seem like a decent combination.

Starting at 6th.

Any thoughts?

I think it's somewhat funny that Paladin or Ranger can afford to have odd level when multiclassing with Artificer, thanks to their opposing rules for spellcasting when multiclassed.
Likewise, Artificer alone can afford to have an odd level when multiclassed.

Paladin or Ranger is forced to round their levels down, but Artificer round them up, so together, they come up with a perfect match as compared to single-classed Artificer, Paladin, or Ranger of the same character level.

To explain with my own build idea (Oath of the Ancients 13/Artificer 7; not sure which sub-class, tbh)
When multiclassed, Paladin 13 counts for 6.5 levels, rounded down to 6.
When multiclassed, Artificer 7 counts for 3.5 levels, rounded up to 4.
When together, Paladin 13 and Artificer 7 = 10 multiclassed spellcasting levels (6 + 4), which has exactly the same amount of spell slots as either class would have, when single-classed.

Compared to Paladin 13/Ranger 7:
When multiclassed, Ranger 7 also counts for 3.5 levels, but with their level rounded down to 3, together, Paladin 13/Ranger 7 would equal to only 9 levels for multiclassed spellcasting, which is same as a 18th level Paladin or Ranger would have.

[Damon_Tor]

I've been thinking about how best to abuse Spell Storing Item and Warding Bond.

It seems like the best use would be to hand it off to your Iron Defender and have it cast it on you, but Spell Storing Item says the caster needs to have the object "in hand" and the ID has no hands.

Tiny Servants have hands, though they only have 10 hitpoints each. I suppose you could cast Tiny Servant at level 5 to create 5 of them and just carry them in your backpack along with the SSI. The first has standing orders to use the SSI on you when combat starts, or perhaps a perpetually readied action along with a codeword from you. The second has standing orders to Ready an Action every round, using the SSI on you if it sees the first Servant die. The third through the fifth have the same order, but triggered by the next Servant in order dying.

Tiny Servants last 8 hours, so it seems like a reasonable investment for that spell slot. Especially considering the fact that it's just the last line of defense for a guy with half-plate+shield, +3 to AC from infusions, and permanent 3/4 cover. Oh, and at level 20, +6 to all saves.

[Wildarm]

Already thinking of mods to the Iron Guardian. It's a creature of your own creation. Would need to work with DM but perhaps we can also tweak the stats to be more stealthy:

Battle Smith 5/Arcane Trickster X

Iron Infiltrator:

- 4HP per Artificer Level vs 5
- Small Sized
- Swap Dex/Str (AC and damage remain the same)
- Gains Proficiency in Stealth

Losing some HP seems like a fair trade off for small size and proficiency in stealth.

Any thoughts? Artificer always struck me as a good base for an arcane investigator or dungeon delver. Combine with AT for more magic tricks and sneakiness.

[Anderlith]

Already thinking of mods to the Iron Guardian. It's a creature of your own creation. Would need to work with DM but perhaps we can also tweak the stats to be more stealthy:

Battle Smith 5/Arcane Trickster X

Iron Infiltrator:

- 4HP per Artificer Level vs 5
- Small Sized
- Swap Dex/Str (AC and damage remain the same)
- Gains Proficiency in Stealth

Losing some HP seems like a fair trade off for small size and proficiency in stealth.

Any thoughts? Artificer always struck me as a good base for an arcane investigator or dungeon delver. Combine with AT for more magic tricks and sneakiness.

You could base it off of the old Furtive Filtcher Homunculus. I know I’d like the Artillerist to get the Arbalester Homunculus rather than his turret

[Misterwhisper]

Went back and updated my review with the last two subclasses added to it.

[Anderlith]

Went back and updated my review with the last two subclasses added to it.

What justifies getting rid of the Homunculi? Artificers have always had them

[Tetrasodium]

What justifies getting rid of the Homunculi? Artificers have always had them

They have yes, but I thing that with the way 5e as a system is structured it might be really hard to make a fun & interesting to play artificer that also has a meaningful homunculi. There is basically no drawback to losing your familiar now & improved familiar is no longer a feat+problematic enough as a warlock pact that I'd not want to see it replicated. The current crop of artificer archtypes are both interesting and thematically fitting to the setting & it's lore. Neither Tesslar(blade of flame books), Tenquis (heirs of dhakaan books), or Lei(dreaming dark books) seemed to have one & all were pretty awesome artificers in their respective non-cannon* novels.

*By design no eberron novel is or will ever be considered cannon including the ones written by keith baker himself. Great sources to mine for info/fluff/depth yes, but not cannon. This avoids the "but in drizzt book 42 it says that..." problem with the cannon novels of other settings.

[Anderlith]

Snip

So... the class should be limited by ephemeral tangential novels that should not be considered cannon which are all based on the ideas presented in TTRPGs?

That’s your justification? The Artificer is already struggling with the low-magic limitations of 5e. Crafting rules, magic items, & feats are already “optional”. So they have to careful design this class to not set on any toes or encourage feat taxes. This is why they have repeating crossbows & +x wands. Not because they want to make the Artificer more powerful but because they don’t want to impose or invalidate certain builds. Homunculi are a core part of Artificers, & I’m glad that they are giving variety to the subclasses the way they are.

[Misterwhisper]

What justifies getting rid of the Homunculi? Artificers have always had them

I didn't say anything about getting rid of homunculi, I said get rid of iron defender and just make a combat pet centric subclass and let battle smith be the weapon based artificer subclass.

[Anderlith]

I didn't say anything about getting rid of homunculi, I said get rid of iron defender and just make a combat pet centric subclass and let battle smith be the weapon based artificer subclass.

So, which Homunculus would they get?

[Misterwhisper]

So, which Homunculus would they get?

You are using homunculi to mean the pet of every subclass, however, the actual term homunculus is only the name of the alchemist subclass pet.

I said get rid of iron defender the pet for the battle smith.

They don't need a pet, they are built to be the weapon user subclass. Just give them better personal abilities with no pet.

Make a stand alone subclass that specifically gets a very nice pet as its main point not just tacked on with the battle smith.

Not every artificer needs a pet.

[Arkhios]

So, which Homunculus would they get?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/1e/4e/ac/1e4eac21ad4103b51dd1383d2f99d213.jpg

[Anderlith]

You are using homunculi to mean the pet of every subclass, however, the actual term homunculus is only the name of the alchemist subclass pet.

I said get rid of iron defender the pet for the battle smith.

They don't need a pet, they are built to be the weapon user subclass. Just give them better personal abilities with no pet.

Make a stand alone subclass that specifically gets a very nice pet as its main point not just tacked on with the battle smith.

Not every artificer needs a pet.

Iron Defender is a Homunculus variant introduced in the Eberron books, you know, the one which introduced the Artificer? You want to take an iconic class feature away from them.

[Arkhios]

You are using homunculi to mean the pet of every subclass, however, the actual term homunculus is only the name of the alchemist subclass pet.

I said get rid of iron defender the pet for the battle smith.

They don't need a pet, they are built to be the weapon user subclass. Just give them better personal abilities with no pet.

Make a stand alone subclass that specifically gets a very nice pet as its main point not just tacked on with the battle smith.

Not every artificer needs a pet.

To be honest, before looking at it's details, I half-expected Battle Smith to be more like the Self-forged from 4th edition.

[Misterwhisper]

To be honest, before looking at it's details, I half-expected Battle Smith to be more like the Self-forged from 4th edition.

I was thinking more like a hex blade/eldritch knight, yet it is more like a beast master with a hex blade dip.