Artillerist vs Battle Smith. Opinions?

[Yakmala]

I'm about to begin a new Eberron campaign using the recently released Rising from the Last War rules and I've been looking forward to playing an Artificer.

My initial intent, based on what I read back when the Artificer was still in UA, was a Battle Smith. Loved the idea of a combat healer with pet. But after reading over the latest version of the class in Rising from the Last War, I have some concerns and might be leaning towards Artillerist instead.

My biggest concern is the Steel Defender. It starts with a low hit bonus and damage output, compared to the Artillerist's turret(s) and while I know it scales over time via Might of the Master, it doesn't seem to keep pace from a DPS standpoint.

The Steel Defender's DPS, however, is a minor concern compared to the way in which it takes actions. Having it require a Bonus action to act makes it better than the current (non-UA) Beast Master pet, but it still eliminates a number of potential build ideas involving feats such as Crossbow Mastery or GWM, as they will compete with the Steel Defender for the Bonus Action.

Most concerning of all, the Steel Defender always acts after the Battle Smith during initiative, making it incapable of performing the Help action for the Battle Smith unless the Battle Smith reserves their action.

It seems like the best use of the Steel Defender, at least for a melee based Battle Smith, would be to have it take the Dodge action, which frees up the Battle Smith's Bonus action, and then have it use it's reaction for Deflect Attack to protect the Battle Smith while both are in melee with a target.

Arcane Jolts recovering on a Long, rather than a Short rest aren't doing the Battle Smith any favors either.

Compare that to the Artillerist's Eldritch cannons, two of the three having very nice features [flamethrower is kind of meh], their Arcane Firearm and (in my opinion) superior spell list and it's hard to see a reason to pick Battle Smith, unless you absolutely want to be a melee artificer or want to take advantage of the Battle Smith being SAD due to Battle Ready, which, admittedly, is nice.

But all of this is me reading stats, which is not the same as playing one in an actual game.

So I'd like to hear from anyone currently playing an Artillerist or Battle Smith, or better yet, someone who has tried both, about how they felt about their choice of Artificer sub-class.

[Misterwhisper]

I'm about to begin a new Eberron campaign using the recently released Rising from the Last War rules and I've been looking forward to playing an Artificer.

My initial intent, based on what I read back when the Artificer was still in UA, was a Battle Smith. Loved the idea of a combat healer with pet. But after reading over the latest version of the class in Rising from the Last War, I have some concerns and might be leaning towards Artillerist instead.

My biggest concern is the Steel Defender. It starts with a low hit bonus and damage output, compared to the Artillerist's turret(s) and while I know it scales over time via Might of the Master, it doesn't seem to keep pace from a DPS standpoint.

The Steel Defender's DPS, however, is a minor concern compared to the way in which it takes actions. Having it require a Bonus action to act makes it better than the current (non-UA) Beast Master pet, but it still eliminates a number of potential build ideas involving feats such as Crossbow Mastery or GWM, as they will compete with the Steel Defender for the Bonus Action.

Most concerning of all, the Steel Defender always acts after the Battle Smith during initiative, making it incapable of performing the Help action for the Battle Smith unless the Battle Smith reserves their action.

It seems like the best use of the Steel Defender, at least for a melee based Battle Smith, would be to have it take the Dodge action, which frees up the Battle Smith's Bonus action, and then have it use it's reaction for Deflect Attack to protect the Battle Smith while both are in melee with a target.

Arcane Jolts recovering on a Long, rather than a Short rest aren't doing the Battle Smith any favors either.

Compare that to the Artillerist's Eldritch cannons, two of the three having very nice features [flamethrower is kind of meh], their Arcane Firearm and (in my opinion) superior spell list and it's hard to see a reason to pick Battle Smith, unless you absolutely want to be a melee artificer or want to take advantage of the Battle Smith being SAD due to Battle Ready, which, admittedly, is nice.

But all of this is me reading stats, which is not the same as playing one in an actual game.

So I'd like to hear from anyone currently playing an Artillerist or Battle Smith, or better yet, someone who has tried both, about how they felt about their choice of Artificer sub-class.

I see the artillerist as being far better.

The battlesmith is like a mesh up of something that should have been 2 subclasses.

Battlesmith should have been the subclass for int based weapon combat and they should have made a different one as the combat pet subclass.

Also I like the idea of summoning an arcane pistol cannon. I kind of wish they did something better with the level 5 ability.

[stoutstien]

I have one each running so I can tell you what I have noted.
Both are solid options. Artillerist end up better if your table doesn't track time very much and the battle Smith pulls ahead on long adventuring days and control.(the turret last one hour. How long is that in *game* time for your individual group?)
BS are also tend to be very greedy with infusions but can also but also is never locked into a single option. A paladin does more Melee damage and a ranger can do more ranged but the BS can do about 80% of each at the same time.

Some general notes:
-Anyone can heal the ST with mending. If you and one one other party member grabs it you can keep it up and running between encounters fairly easily.
-The ST can attune to magical items. Do with this what you will
-the healing arcane jolt is generally more useful.
- the radiant weapon infusion is not limit to melee weapons and has no range limit.
-The repulsion shield has no save or range limit.( If a creature has reach on their attack you can still shove them)
from lv 6-10 they both give you a handful of reactions to use/handout to set up the party.
-SSI and warding bond is a fun combo. Practically doubles the party's HP on top of the AC and save bonus.

Good news is both of the Subclasses are going to play similarly from 1-3 so you don't need to decide right away.

[AgenderArcee]

Haven't played an Artificer myself but just want to note that just because the Steel Defender can't Help you doesn't mean it can't Help others in your party. Could be very useful if you have a Rogue or a Great Weapon master/Sharpshooter user.

[Quietus]

Battle smooth looks like fun, but I have to say, I've been playing a goblin Artillerist, and it has been a blast. That level 5 bump to all your spells isn't anything to scoff at, the extra 1d8 makes the few spells you do cat do better work, and bumps your cantrips considerably. The issue will be the fact that you have so few cantrips, only 2 to go around for the longest time.

I have really enjoyed making use of the turrets; force turret is my go to (enhanced arcane focus works on its attack rolls, remember!), and shield has saved our bacon so many times. It's your strongest defensive feature for sure. Flamethrower is a nice pocket option to have, but I've only used it a couple times. Any of them are absolutely worth the spell slot to re- summon if necessary.

[MaxWilson]

Battle smooth looks like fun, but I have to say, I've been playing a goblin Artillerist, and it has been a blast. That level 5 bump to all your spells isn't anything to scoff at, the extra 1d8 makes the few spells you do cat do better work, and bumps your cantrips considerably. The issue will be the fact that you have so few cantrips, only 2 to go around for the longest time.

Goblin Artillerist has a great synergy: you can run into the middle of a mob, toss off a 2d6+d8 Thunderclap cantrip in a 5' radius*, and Disengage out of there. It's like a low-budget at-will mini-Fireball.

* There is some controversy about exactly how spell radii work for spells with range: self like Thunderclap, Spirit Guardians, etc. Some DMs will rule that a 5' radius is a 10' diameter, others rule that it's more like a 15' diameter, and which ruling they make affects how good this combo is. Getting to inflict 2d6+d8 (11) damage on potentially up to nine enemies (99 damage) on a cantrip at level 5 is fun to dream about. Even if you really only get 3-5 enemies it's still cool.

[Pex]

Both are good. Choose either. Do you feel like you want to be strong in melee or range? There's your answer. Not meant to sound dismissive. It's really a complement to the class. You cannot go wrong with either option. Choose which ever one you'll have fun playing. Play the other one in another game.

[Smoothjedi]

Compare that to the Artillerist's Eldritch cannons, two of the three having very nice features [flamethrower is kind of meh], their Arcane Firearm and (in my opinion) superior spell list and it's hard to see a reason to pick Battle Smith, unless you absolutely want to be a melee artificer or want to take advantage of the Battle Smith being SAD due to Battle Ready, which, admittedly, is nice.

Treantmonk recently did an artillerist build, and he highly recommended the flamethrower, mainly because half damage on a save plus the chance to hit multiple targets potentially adds up to a lot more damage than just the BS pet attack or the force cannon on average.
I'm actually thinking that a warforged melee artillerist is the best option. With the common magic item wand sheath, you can hold your flamethrower in your hand while having your wand equipped in your sheath. With a 14 dex it's not hard to have a 21 AC with an infusion on half plate and/or your shield. Your cannon isn't going to take much damage in your hand, so you can drop mending until you get a second one, and go with thorn whip for positioning enemies for flamethrower and shocking grasp for positioning yourself.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I had two level 5 artificers, one artillerist (rock gnome) and one lance-wielding battle smith (goblin), in a game during the holidays. They rode a PAM-using reindeer centaur battlemaster fighter together, making for one heck of a team. Uh, until a dominate effect caused the battle smith to murder the reindeer while he was riding it. But it was working really great up until then!

Of the two, the artillerist easily did the most damage. They're kitted impressively well for it, what with the amplified cantrips and the sidearm. Shatter also made a huge difference; it was no fireball, but in the land of the blind, the one-eyed gnome is king.

The battle smith was no slouch, though. Their damage was respectable, they still had tons of utility, and the defender was useful whenever I used a battle map (conversely, mostly useless the two times I didn't).

I'd say the battle smith is overall "weaker", but not so much that I'd care if I wanted to play a half-casting tinker gish. It works quite well. Though the artillerist definitely caught my eye. There's something magical about throwing out that much ordnance every round.

[Chaosmancer]

I'm playing a Gnome Artillerist in Mad Mage right now.

For our group, in this dungeon, the Protector turret has been indispensable, in fact, I used the cannon last session, and I'm wondering if I ever will again. Because we have zero stealth, so the extra hp has been really neccessary to keep everyone alive.

Shield, Medium Armor, mending and a long range cantrip. I've got surprisingly high AC, good HP, and hitting for 3d8 a round with the cantrip means I'm equivalent to an 11th level caster on my at-wills.

I'm mostly playing support and saving my spells for big moments at this time. I just don't have enough slots to utilize them a lot, so most combats are Ray of Frost, bonus action turret, rinse and repeat til enemy is dead.

Because you have so few cantrips, Magic Initiate or something similiar is very tempting, giving you more ranged options and maybe shocking grasp if you get charged (I have no melee options at the moment other than a dagger, so that is something to watch for, though, the cannon can be activated first, and might push the enemy off youso you can retreat)

Theorycrafting with the Battle Smith, because I haven't seen it yet.

I think melee is not the way to go with the Battle Smith. I'd go Heavy Crossbow most likely. You'll be a little lower in AC because you can't use a shield, but with Repeating Shot you'll be using a +1 weapon and enhanced Defenses keeps you real close to the AC you want. Then, while you are shooting, the Steel Defender is in melee assisting the melee characters and granting disadvantage.

One thing not to forget, is that you get Warding Bond. This increases the hp and AC of the Steel Defender, and the defender can be easily healed through multiple sources (mending cantrip heals 2d6 per minute and the defender has 3/day 2d8+2 healing. This actually makes your Defender very tough over the course of a day, and it can absorb a lot of punishment. Plus, if it is destroyed, all it takes is a 1st level slot and 1 minute to bring it back up to full health.

[MaxWilson]

One thing not to forget, is that you get Warding Bond. This increases the hp and AC of the Steel Defender, and the defender can be easily healed through multiple sources (mending cantrip heals 2d6 per minute and the defender has 3/day 2d8+2 healing. This actually makes your Defender very tough over the course of a day, and it can absorb a lot of punishment. Plus, if it is destroyed, all it takes is a 1st level slot and 1 minute to bring it back up to full health.

IMO this is actually a strong argument against Warding Bond. The Steel Defender is quite sturdy especially if you leave it on the default Dodge action, and its HP are cheaper than your own HP, so Warding Bond actually makes damage that it takes more expensive by forcing you to heal yourself.

[Smoothjedi]

Plus, if it is destroyed, all it takes is a 1st level slot and 1 minute to bring it back up to full health.


IMO this is actually a strong argument against Warding Bond. The Steel Defender is quite sturdy especially if you leave it on the default Dodge action, and its HP are cheaper than your own HP, so Warding Bond actually makes damage that it takes more expensive by forcing you to heal yourself.

Yeah, I agree. It's going to take a lot more than a first level slot to recover if you get destroyed as well because of the bond.

[MaxWilson]

IMO this is actually a strong argument against Warding Bond. The Steel Defender is quite sturdy especially if you leave it on the default Dodge action, and its HP are cheaper than your own HP, so Warding Bond actually makes damage that it takes more expensive by forcing you to heal yourself.

Let me hasten to add that I'm not saying you shouldn't cast Warding Bond--just not on your defender. It's still a fantastic defensive spell for some tank or squishy in your party, befitting the Battlesmith's role of "combat medic and protector", and you can use Aura of Vitality afterward to efficiently heal any damage that does get inflicted.

Warding Bond doesn't reduce total damage taken (much), but it can significantly reduce the risk by spreading the damage around. E.g. having the party wizard drop from 40 HP down to 22 HP in one round against a troll (and the Battlesmith likewise lose 18 HP) is significantly less panic-inducing than having the party wizard drop from 40 HP down to 3 HP. The +1 bonus to the wizard's concentration saves doesn't hurt either.

Don't forget that at 11th level you gain the ability to allow other people to cast a spell too, which can be Warding Bond, and that lets you spread damage around the party even more. E.g. the bard can leech HP (via resistance) off of the Necromancer's zombies by letting the zombie Warding Bond the bard.

[Pex]

Treantmonk recently did an artillerist build, and he highly recommended the flamethrower, mainly because half damage on a save plus the chance to hit multiple targets potentially adds up to a lot more damage than just the BS pet attack or the force cannon on average.
I'm actually thinking that a warforged melee artillerist is the best option. With the common magic item wand sheath, you can hold your flamethrower in your hand while having your wand equipped in your sheath. With a 14 dex it's not hard to have a 21 AC with an infusion on half plate and/or your shield. Your cannon isn't going to take much damage in your hand, so you can drop mending until you get a second one, and go with thorn whip for positioning enemies for flamethrower and shocking grasp for positioning yourself.

That's his personal bias. When he did his spell reviews he was consistently hating on any spell where making the saving throw means nothing happens. He thinks that's a waste of a turn. He wants guaranteed effect of anything all the time every time. That's fine for his personal taste, but it is not authoritative definition. Of course it's disappointing when you miss an attack roll, but that's part of the game. It's still fun, and the attack mode is still effective over the long run. It is satisfying when you do hit, and elation when you critical hit. It's risk vs reward, and the reward you get is worth the risk it doesn't work for a round. Guaranteed stuff happening is its own fun and nice to have, but it's a personal preference not a superiority.

[Misterwhisper]

That's his personal bias. When he did his spell reviews he was consistently hating on any spell where making the saving throw means nothing happens. He thinks that's a waste of a turn. He wants guaranteed effect of anything all the time every time. That's fine for his personal taste, but it is not authoritative definition. Of course it's disappointing when you miss an attack roll, but that's part of the game. It's still fun, and the attack mode is still effective over the long run. It is satisfying when you do hit, and elation when you critical hit. It's risk vs reward, and the reward you get is worth the risk it doesn't work for a round. Guaranteed stuff happening is its own fun and nice to have, but it's a personal preference not a superiority.

He also greatly overvalues summoning spells and tends to dislike damaging spells in general.

Not even going to get started on his dual wielded interpretation...

People should take his opinion as general guidelines not like it is from a developer.

[Smoothjedi]

That's his personal bias.
...
It's risk vs reward, and the reward you get is worth the risk it doesn't work for a round. Guaranteed stuff happening is its own fun and nice to have, but it's a personal preference not a superiority.


He also greatly overvalues summoning spells and tends to dislike damaging spells in general.

Not even going to get started on his dual wielded interpretation...

People should take his opinion as general guidelines not like it is from a developer.

Both of these are fair points, and I'm not saying his opinion is gospel or anything. Keep in mind though those biases about summoning and damage spells is generally on wizards or druids or whatever that can have more controller type roles. The artillerist's focus is really on damage, and his build was definitely geared that way.

The melee build I offered in my follow up statement was thematically different than the ranged build he suggested anyway. All that aside though, my main point was that the flamethrower is pretty effective, and I think it's worth reconsidering rather than brushing it off with a meh. 2d8 to multiple targets in a cone on a bonus action, especially if you help line them up with thorn whip on your regular action, is typically significantly better damage than the force cannon that does 2d8 to a single target and only crits on a 20.

At times of course you may have flying or resistant targets, or some other reason it is not feasible for you or your turret to close within 15' of them, so it's certainly nice having the ranged option available. In most circumstances though I think flamethrowers are the superior option.

[Chaosmancer]

Yeah, I think my biggest issue with the flamethrower is having to get so close to utilize it.

Artillerists are ranged characters, and you are summoning a turret to last for one hour. If you are that close to multiple enemies and your allies are not in the way of the flamethrower, that much over the course of multiple fights, it is a bad deal for you. And, while the turret can move, it only moves 15 ft, which makes it incredibly slow to reposition.

Protector theoretically has this same problem, but A) only needing to target allies in a radius instead of enemies in a cone, and B) being so much more powerful of an option to drop 1d8+mod temp hp every turn as a bonus action, makes it much easier to ignore those downsides.

Also, it gives Temp Hp to itself, which makes it the hardest to destroy of all the turrets.

[Smoothjedi]

I'm actually thinking that a warforged melee artillerist is the best option. With the common magic item wand sheath, you can hold your flamethrower in your hand while having your wand equipped in your sheath. With a 14 dex it's not hard to have a 21 AC with an infusion on half plate and/or your shield. Your cannon isn't going to take much damage in your hand, so you can drop mending until you get a second one, and go with thorn whip for positioning enemies for flamethrower and shocking grasp for positioning yourself.


Yeah, I think my biggest issue with the flamethrower is having to get so close to utilize it.

Artillerists are ranged characters, and you are summoning a turret to last for one hour. If you are that close to multiple enemies and your allies are not in the way of the flamethrower, that much over the course of multiple fights, it is a bad deal for you. And, while the turret can move, it only moves 15 ft, which makes it incredibly slow to reposition.

Protector theoretically has this same problem, but A) only needing to target allies in a radius instead of enemies in a cone, and B) being so much more powerful of an option to drop 1d8+mod temp hp every turn as a bonus action, makes it much easier to ignore those downsides.

Also, it gives Temp Hp to itself, which makes it the hardest to destroy of all the turrets.

This is why I suggested a melee warforged. I quoted that part of it for reference. If you're unable to acquire a common magic item, then you'd have to wait until 6 for the sheath infusion, but considering it's Eberron (or even FR, if allowed) I don't think that should be too hard to come by one.
Holding the cannon in your hand gives it a lot of the protections that are afforded any other weapon or shield, and solves the speed problem. It's not going to be making separate saving throws, or having its hit points challenged much. I guess maybe if you're stunned or something that makes you drop gear, something could burst it down before you can pick it up again, but that was probably worth a first level spell for your turret to soak a high burst of damage instead anyway.
Your AC is going to be solid, especially having shield if really needed, and warforged can get great Con, so why not just walk right up there and catch everything on fire? Your cantrips can do good damage with your firearm regardless of whether they're melee or not, so pick thorn whip and shocking grasp, and burninate everything!

[HappyDaze]

People should take his opinion as general guidelines not like it is from a developer.

I've found that both get (and possibly deserve) a lot of scorn.

[Sherlockpwns]

I got to play my close range artillerist a bit, though didn't take it too far before the game ended. I can say this:

The flamethrower is awesome and fun. The Artillerst Flamethrower fits a niche that is basically absent from most other builds: A close range AOE fighter. Kinda reminds me of the days back when Whirlwind Strike was a thing.

In my case I went with Artillerist 4, Light Cleric X, though there's plenty of ways to build this (including just artificer). There's some interesting mechanic challenges to overcome.

1) Handheld Flamethower gets rid of its mobility problem and the odds of it getting destroyed BUT ... you can't use a flamethrower + a shield and still use a wand for the artillerist +1d8. (This is why I went with Cleric of Light, you could also have used Tempest, but I had an RP reason for using fire spells)

2) With a shield (Cleric focus) and a flamethrower you can't actually make an attack of opportunity very well without getting Warcaster.

But yeah, being able to run up and cast burning hands followed by a 2d8 flame attack and hit multiple enemies was incredibly effecive in most fights. It was fun, it let me mess around with positioning myself and enemies in optimal ways, and made for a weird hybrid tank caster. I think the temp HP generator is also very powerful btw, and I put the long range cannon in last place (But still pretty amazing). Basically, even if you only have them for 1 fight they're totally worth spending an action to have, and odds are you'll have the same turret in multiple fights.

So how's it stack up vs. BS?

I think the problem with BS is it is way more straight forward. When it comes to a 1 on 1 brawl the BS is fantastic. Disadvantage every round is a big deal, even if its just 1 attack. The fact it can do this to help your allies is akin to being able to trigger Warding Flare every round. The damage is meh at best, but it does net you an extra reaction attack. So in parties with lots of people tossing around Command or Whispers or fear spells, it's a nice bonus.

I also think the big issue with the BS pet is if your DM will rule it can use the "Use object" action. RAW it can not. If it can, it adds a TON of value at level 11. Just it being able to cast warding bond is a huge HP boost, but also lets it do things like cast web. If your DM isn't cruel and lets your pet use objects (or at least, some objects designed for its use) I think the BS gains a ton of viability. My biggest issue with the class as a whole is it keeps pace really well to level 5 and then starts to really lose focus.

While initially I was thinking the BS is best served by being the better mounted combat guy, the more I look at it, the more it seems to just want to be a guy in the back with a heavy crossbow, using the defender to help the front line tanks rather than himself. Probably with a splash of fighter for the +2 to hit or 2-3 levels or ranger... unless you're making a B-line for level 11 and that huge surge of power.

Anyway, long story short is while at first it appears that the Artillerist and Battlesmith are both damage dealers, the reality is BS is more of a tank/defense utility guy and the artillerist is a DPS machine and they're not actually that similar at all.

[Smoothjedi]

1) Handheld Flamethower gets rid of its mobility problem and the odds of it getting destroyed BUT ... you can't use a flamethrower + a shield and still use a wand for the artillerist +1d8. (This is why I went with Cleric of Light, you could also have used Tempest, but I had an RP reason for using fire spells)



The key to fix this issue is to just play a warforged with the common magic item wand sheath. It attunes alongside the wand, and it allows you to mount it on your arm, keeping your hand free. Then you can carry the turret in your hand with no issues. If for some reason you can't make one or buy one, you could use a 6th level infusion slot on it.

[Chaosmancer]

This is why I suggested a melee warforged. I quoted that part of it for reference. If you're unable to acquire a common magic item, then you'd have to wait until 6 for the sheath infusion, but considering it's Eberron (or even FR, if allowed) I don't think that should be too hard to come by one.
Holding the cannon in your hand gives it a lot of the protections that are afforded any other weapon or shield, and solves the speed problem. It's not going to be making separate saving throws, or having its hit points challenged much. I guess maybe if you're stunned or something that makes you drop gear, something could burst it down before you can pick it up again, but that was probably worth a first level spell for your turret to soak a high burst of damage instead anyway.
Your AC is going to be solid, especially having shield if really needed, and warforged can get great Con, so why not just walk right up there and catch everything on fire? Your cantrips can do good damage with your firearm regardless of whether they're melee or not, so pick thorn whip and shocking grasp, and burninate everything!

shrug

It is a decent build, I don't know exactly what wand sheaths do off the top of my head, but it is highly specific. This build only works with a warforged, and only a warforged who has a wand sheath (which is something you can build as an Artificer, just takes an infusion).

So, a Gnome for example can't do this. Or an Elf, or any other race a player might want to play. So, it doesn't really change my perception of the subclass or the difficulties in setting up those AOEs.

[Smoothjedi]

shrug

It is a decent build, I don't know exactly what wand sheaths do off the top of my head, but it is highly specific. This build only works with a warforged, and only a warforged who has a wand sheath (which is something you can build as an Artificer, just takes an infusion).

So, a Gnome for example can't do this. Or an Elf, or any other race a player might want to play. So, it doesn't really change my perception of the subclass or the difficulties in setting up those AOEs.

It allows you to have your wand on your arm keeping your hand free. You are mostly right, but eventually you can use magic items regardless of any requirements, but admittedly that is all the way at level 14. So, eventually any artificer should be able to use it. That being said, Warforged is a core race in the same book and setting that artificers are introduced; it's not like I'm suggesting an Aarakocra or Yuan-ti build or something real crazy.

[Chaosmancer]

It allows you to have your wand on your arm keeping your hand free. You are mostly right, but eventually you can use magic items regardless of any requirements, but admittedly that is all the way at level 14. So, eventually any artificer should be able to use it. That being said, Warforged is a core race in the same book and setting that artificers are introduced; it's not like I'm suggesting an Aarakocra or Yuan-ti build or something real crazy.

So, I looked up the wand sheath, there are a few more issues with utilizing it than I thought. Such as requiring attunement (not a big deal if you have a wand you want to attune to as well, but a bigger deal if you don't) and the fact that using the wand now requires a bonus action (which prevents the use of your turret, and is worse than the item interaction needed to draw a normal wand)


But, that's not the point I want to make, just a bit of extra reading I did.

The point I want to make, is that I never said you were proposing a "Crazy build" or anything like that. Just that you were proposing a specific build in response to a general statement. I find it equivalent to discussing the amazing flight benefits of your Feral Tiefling Warlock in response to a discussion about Tomelocks struggling in melee. Yes, the race does give a specific benefit that counteracts that general problem, but most other races do not confer than benefit.

Yes, A melee warforged with a Wand Sheath and the Flamethrower could do exactly what you are saying.

Any build that uses a race other than warforged cannot, because they cannot use a wand sheath. I guess you could go in with using Shocking Grasp or take Magic Initiate Druid for Thorn Whip and Primal Savagery (though, since you wouldn't cast them through your arcane focus, they would not benefit from your level 5 feature, making them weaker, also they would key off wisdom instead of your normal casting stat) and be a melee artillerist, but it is highly specific to go that route. Generally, Artillerists will be ranged fighters, using the ranged cantrips. That will make using a melee ability like the flamethrower more difficult than the other two turrets.

You can break down all the benefits and powers of a warforged, wand sheath, melee artillerist with exact DPS counts if you want. But the second a player chooses literally any other race in the game, your build doesn't work for that player, and so I can't accept it as a general answer to the Flamethrower ability of the class.

Edit: I'm also not going to talk about using a 14th level ability to attune to a common magic item. That would be far too late for any player to effectively utilize, and a complete waste of time for such a high level character.

[Smoothjedi]

So, I looked up the wand sheath, there are a few more issues with utilizing it than I thought. Such as requiring attunement (not a big deal if you have a wand you want to attune to as well, but a bigger deal if you don't) and the fact that using the wand now requires a bonus action (which prevents the use of your turret, and is worse than the item interaction needed to draw a normal wand)

But, that's not the point I want to make, just a bit of extra reading I did.

The point I want to make, is that I never said you were proposing a "Crazy build" or anything like that. Just that you were proposing a specific build in response to a general statement. I find it equivalent to discussing the amazing flight benefits of your Feral Tiefling Warlock in response to a discussion about Tomelocks struggling in melee. Yes, the race does give a specific benefit that counteracts that general problem, but most other races do not confer than benefit.

Yes, A melee warforged with a Wand Sheath and the Flamethrower could do exactly what you are saying.

Any build that uses a race other than warforged cannot, because they cannot use a wand sheath. I guess you could go in with using Shocking Grasp or take Magic Initiate Druid for Thorn Whip and Primal Savagery (though, since you wouldn't cast them through your arcane focus, they would not benefit from your level 5 feature, making them weaker, also they would key off wisdom instead of your normal casting stat) and be a melee artillerist, but it is highly specific to go that route. Generally, Artillerists will be ranged fighters, using the ranged cantrips. That will make using a melee ability like the flamethrower more difficult than the other two turrets.

You can break down all the benefits and powers of a warforged, wand sheath, melee artillerist with exact DPS counts if you want. But the second a player chooses literally any other race in the game, your build doesn't work for that player, and so I can't accept it as a general answer to the Flamethrower ability of the class.

Edit: I'm also not going to talk about using a 14th level ability to attune to a common magic item. That would be far too late for any player to effectively utilize, and a complete waste of time for such a high level character.

Keep in mind that the wand sheath only takes a bonus action to retract or extend. There's nothing stopping you from extending the wand outside of combat and leaving it that way; once it's extended it stays out. Just have it prepared for combat when you go into the dungeon. It doesn't cost a bonus action every round or anything.

My point about it being a core race is that it's not really at all like a Feral Tiefling Warlock, because as all we know flight races are regularly banned in games anyway. Warforged being a core race, and a wand sheath being available as an infusion in the base class, makes it an option that would be AL legal and might also interest someone thinking about going down this route. Just as if someone was considering making a Sorlock, I don't think it's unreasonable for someone to suggest they go half elf for elven accuracy, because that can make them a lot more effective at the class combination they chose.

All that being said, there are other options if you aren't a warforged for a flamethrower to be effective. First off you can make the cannon small or tiny, with legs and a climb speed, so it's not unreasonable for someone to just pick it up and drop it next to the enemies. Alternatively it could mount a melee character, including yourself (make it tiny if they're small), and ride them around shooting flames on your bonus action. It could be separately attacked this way and would be more vulnerable to damage, but the basic idea of the build would still work.

I did concede already that even though at level 14 it is possible, it is well beyond the reach of most adventurers.

[MaxWilson]

Moon Druid 2/Artillerist 3 (Multiattacking bear with a flame thrower) sounds frankly hilarious.

Note: I've noticed a lot of online sources incorrectly report the flamethrower damage as 1d8 (Dex save for half), but it is actually 2d8 (Dex save for half). That makes it enormously better than the Force Ballista in close-range combat. Even against a single target, you'll do more damage than the Force Ballista against all but the softest targets (zombies) or fire-immune targets, unless you've got a way to exploit the Force Ballista's push for extra damage.

However... by level 3, a Moon Druid does have a way to exploit the Force Ballista's push for extra damage. After casting Spike Growth and transforming into a bear on round one, on round two your 6th level Moon Druid 3/Artillerist 3 Grizzly Bear can claw/bite an enemy for d8+2d6+8 (19) damage at +5 to hit, then shoot it with a Force Ballista for another 2d6+2d4 (12) damage, and then the enemy has to take another 2d4 (5) damage (through difficult terrain) to get out, for a grand total of ~36 potential damage. Probably about half that once you factor in misses, and not anywhere close to the damage output a dedicated Sharpshooter/Crossbow Expert would be inflicting at the same level, but still... a bear with a force ballista or a flamethrower in one paw could be fun as a change of pace.

Gnome Artillerist 9/Moon Druid 11 is not a terrible place to wind up eventually, from a mechanical or RP angle perspective. Much worse damage than a dedicated GWM Fighter, but better tankiness, probably comparable to a Barbarian 20, and yet you have more spells and out of combat options than a Barbarian does... plus a flamethrower.

I would play one of these from level 1.

[Warped Wiseman]

Anyway, long story short is while at first it appears that the Artillerist and Battlesmith are both damage dealers, the reality is BS is more of a tank/defense utility guy and the artillerist is a DPS machine and they're not actually that similar at all.

This has been my experience in an AL style campaign with two artillerists and two battlesmiths.

As a side note, if you give your tiny eldritch cannon legs, you can summon it next to you and have it use you as a mount (since it takes 15ft of movement to mount, and it can move exactly that amount each round). That solves the mobility issues and keeps your hands free for your shield and arcane firearm/enhanced arcane focus. I flavored mine as being a shoulder mounted cannon, Warmachine style.

[Makorel]

I may have had a galaxy brain moment as I was going to sleep last night, but it hinges on a couple rules that I'm not too clear about.

First: A Familiar can use any action in combat that is not attacking, including the "use item" action, so does that mean it can also use the Artificer's Spell Storing Item?

If yes, the second question is how viable is it to give your Familiar an Item filled with Faerie Fire, Web or even Grease? If the answer is "viable" then Canned Advantage would be an amazing thing to have for a Battlesmith. Yes any Artificer could do this but the Battlesmith and their Defender are most able to take advantage of, well, advantage.

[stoutstien]

I may have had a galaxy brain moment as I was going to sleep last night, but it hinges on a couple rules that I'm not too clear about.

First: A Familiar can use any action in combat that is not attacking, including the "use item" action, so does that mean it can also use the Artificer's Spell Storing Item?

If yes, the second question is how viable is it to give your Familiar an Item filled with Faerie Fire, Web or even Grease? If the answer is "viable" then Canned Advantage would be an amazing thing to have for a Battlesmith. Yes any Artificer could do this but the Battlesmith and their Defender are most able to take advantage of, well, advantage.

sounds right. i plan on either talking the party wizard into letting me use his familiar or grab it via ritual caster which will also lighten the load on prepared spells .the artificer's ability to quickly make spell scrolls comes in handy here.

[Smoothjedi]

This has been my experience in an AL style campaign with two artillerists and two battlesmiths.

As a side note, if you give your tiny eldritch cannon legs, you can summon it next to you and have it use you as a mount (since it takes 15ft of movement to mount, and it can move exactly that amount each round). That solves the mobility issues and keeps your hands free for your shield and arcane firearm/enhanced arcane focus. I flavored mine as being a shoulder mounted cannon, Warmachine style.

Yeah, this is basically what I was suggesting, although technically it costs half your speed to mount a creature. Therefore, it would only take 12.5 feet of movement for a gnome to mount something, and 7.5 feet of movement for the cannon to do so, and I'm not exactly sure how that rounds (up to a 5 foot increment?).

[Teaguethebean]

sounds right. i plan on either talking the party wizard into letting me use his familiar or grab it via ritual caster which will also lighten the load on prepared spells .the artificer's ability to quickly make spell scrolls comes in handy here.

Why ask the wizard if you can use it tell him he can now do that with his familiar. Make it so he feels like the star player when it was your master plan all along.

[Smoothjedi]

I may have had a galaxy brain moment as I was going to sleep last night, but it hinges on a couple rules that I'm not too clear about.

First: A Familiar can use any action in combat that is not attacking, including the "use item" action, so does that mean it can also use the Artificer's Spell Storing Item?

If yes, the second question is how viable is it to give your Familiar an Item filled with Faerie Fire, Web or even Grease? If the answer is "viable" then Canned Advantage would be an amazing thing to have for a Battlesmith. Yes any Artificer could do this but the Battlesmith and their Defender are most able to take advantage of, well, advantage.

Yeah, Shatter would be pretty good as well if you want to just pile on nuke damage rather than CC spells.

[Evaar]

I may have had a galaxy brain moment as I was going to sleep last night, but it hinges on a couple rules that I'm not too clear about.

First: A Familiar can use any action in combat that is not attacking, including the "use item" action, so does that mean it can also use the Artificer's Spell Storing Item?

If yes, the second question is how viable is it to give your Familiar an Item filled with Faerie Fire, Web or even Grease? If the answer is "viable" then Canned Advantage would be an amazing thing to have for a Battlesmith. Yes any Artificer could do this but the Battlesmith and their Defender are most able to take advantage of, well, advantage.

Yes they can. Some people have already caught on to this.

Some folks have stated the familiar still cannot cast spells that require attack rolls, I'm not prepared to do the lawyering on that at the moment, but all seem agreed that they can use a spell storing item that causes a saving throw. So for things like Shatter it's a vast DPR increase.

[Smoothjedi]

Yes they can. Some people have already caught on to this.

Some folks have stated the familiar still cannot cast spells that require attack rolls, I'm not prepared to do the lawyering on that at the moment, but all seem agreed that they can use a spell storing item that causes a saving throw. So for things like Shatter it's a vast DPR increase.

The rule is: "While holding the object, a creature can take an action to produce the spell's effect from it, using your spellcasting ability modifier. …"

Therefore, the familiar is technically never actually casting the spell; they are using an action to produce its effects. Therefore, attack roll spells seem fine to me.

EDIT: It does straight up say that a familiar can't attack, so I guess this is a grey area for me.

[stoutstien]

Why ask the wizard if you can use it tell him he can now do that with his familiar. Make it so he feels like the star player when it was your master plan all along.

well me and the wizard are in a cold war of sorts. last session he used my warforged artilerist as a bunker busting bomb by destroying my parachute pants (feather fall) as we where trying to stealthy land on a hostile boat. i only survived because i had my protector THP and aid active. i did hit the captain on my way through the decks so not a total loss.

[Teaguethebean]

well me and the wizard are in a cold war of sorts. last session he used my warforged artilerist as a bunker busting bomb by destroying my parachute pants (feather fall) as we where trying to stealthy land on a hostile boat. i only survived because i had my protector THP and aid active. i did hit the captain on my way through the decks so not a total loss.

Perhaps this would be seen as a peace offering and in game could lead to some fun roleplaying of your character really doing for personal gain.

[micahaphone]

This has been my experience in an AL style campaign with two artillerists and two battlesmiths.

As a side note, if you give your tiny eldritch cannon legs, you can summon it next to you and have it use you as a mount (since it takes 15ft of movement to mount, and it can move exactly that amount each round). That solves the mobility issues and keeps your hands free for your shield and arcane firearm/enhanced arcane focus. I flavored mine as being a shoulder mounted cannon, Warmachine style.

Minor nitpick, mounting takes half your movement, not a set amount. Also why not just summon the cannon onto your shoulder?

[Smoothjedi]

Minor nitpick, mounting takes half your movement, not a set amount. Also why not just summon the cannon onto your shoulder?

It does specifically say that "you can take an action to magically create a Small or Tiny eldritch cannon in an unoccupied space on a horizontal surface within 5 feet of you."

[stoutstien]

Perhaps this would be seen as a peace offering and in game could lead to some fun roleplaying of your character really doing for personal gain.

Like the doctor Pulaski/Data relationship, He just doesn't see me as 'real' nor do I wish to be.



*In real life it all on good fun. I actually almost fell out of chair laughing when I splattered the NPC on way to an almost watery grave. The player in question was worried I would be mad but honestly it was clever and I've had PCs die is less epic ways.

* Only me and the DM know that my warforged is actually his dead son brought back from a wish he cast from a deal from a otherworldly being.

[Teaguethebean]

* Only me and the DM know that my warforged is actually his dead son brought back from a wish he cast from a deal from a otherworldly being.

Holy sh** that plot twist got me good your game sounds really fun.

[Sherlockpwns]

Minor nitpick, mounting takes half your movement, not a set amount. Also why not just summon the cannon onto your shoulder?

I think this is just a DM call. Can a turrent mount a player? It's the same question on whether or not a gnome can mount a human (GET YOUR MIND OUT OF THE GUTTER). It's RAW, sure, but I haven't had a DM yet who would let me ride another player around like we're playing a game of chicken fight.

So many you convince your DM that you've made a special harness, hat, or mount on your shield that the turret can sit. I think that is cool, but in the end it is the whim of the DM. This is why I built my artillerist to avoid the level 5 ability and focus on something else (in my case, burning things with holy fire... and real fire too).

Similarly, the warforged wand sheath is 100% viable, albeit a little bit cheesy. I actually LIKE that my cleric had to work around these weird restrictions. It made the character feel more "right" early on. Sure I couldn't opportunity attack worth a damn (-1 STR and an improved weapon), but holy cow was he a monster on the front line. I certainly didn't feel hamstrung by it and it made a lot of interesting decision making. Unlike most front line fighters, I basically provided zero CC, so my position was all about maximizing my damage without risking instant death (which nearly happened several times because... how can you resist burning 4 enemies!).


All I know is it was one of the most fun characters I have played in a very long while, full of intersting in combat and out of combat decision. So much so that at level 4 I took Observant instead of war caster, giving a lot more legs to the RP and non-combat side of the character (also I had an odd wis score).

[Yakmala]

Great replies, everyone. Thanks!

Ultimately, I ended up going with a House Cannith Mark of Making Artillerst [campaign is set in Eberron]. It fit well into the character background and getting Mending via Mark of Making frees up one of the two precious cantrip slots for something else and lets me cast magic weapon without concentration for one of my party members [I'll be slinging cantrips rather than weapons]

So, what are your opinions on Feats for Artificers? To me, the top 5 picks would be:


Sharpshooter, if you plan to use a bow/crossbow.
Medium Armor Mastery. Never hurts to boost AC.
Ritual Caster [Wizard]. Start life with a mechanical owl buddy and collect additional rituals.
Magic Initiate. If you absolutely need another cantrip.
Elemental Adept. Make sure those fire bolts hurt everything they hit.

[HappyDaze]

I think this is just a DM call. Can a turrent mount a player? It's the same question on whether or not a gnome can mount a human (GET YOUR MIND OUT OF THE GUTTER). It's RAW, sure, but I haven't had a DM yet who would let me ride another player around like we're playing a game of chicken fight.


Actually it's not quite the same question since the turret is a magical object rather than a creature. IIRC, the rules for mounts call out creatures.

[Chaosmancer]

So, what are your opinions on Feats for Artificers? To me, the top 5 picks would be:


Sharpshooter, if you plan to use a bow/crossbow.
Medium Armor Mastery. Never hurts to boost AC.
Ritual Caster [Wizard]. Start life with a mechanical owl buddy and collect additional rituals.
Magic Initiate. If you absolutely need another cantrip.
Elemental Adept. Make sure those fire bolts hurt everything they hit.



Those all seem pretty decent.

Spell Sniper is another that gets you a cantrip, and the increased range can be nice.

I took Healer to double up on support. You don't get a lot of spell slots at lower levels, and it's really good healing from that feat.

Warcaster could be awesome.

[Tokuhara]

My personal take is Battlesmith, but I also adore it as a "Fixed Beastmaster" (VHuman (MI: Wizard) Battlesmith)

[Smoothjedi]

Actually it's not quite the same question since the turret is a magical object rather than a creature. IIRC, the rules for mounts call out creatures.

Although it probably is not using mounting rules, if it has a climb speed it shouldn't just fall off a vertical surface. Should that surface move, it would move with it, just like if it were up a tree and the tree moved. Therefore I don't think it's unreasonable that if it climbs a player, and that player moves, it would stay attached.

[Sherlockpwns]

Although it probably not using mounting rules, if it has a climb speed it shouldn't just fall off a vertical surface. Should that surface move, it would move with it, just like if it were up a tree and the tree moved. Therefore I don't think it's unreasonable that if it climbs a player, and that player moves, it would stay attached.

Yeah, I could see that, and I could see the DM letting you have the turret mount you with the regular rules. Or I could see a DM saying "You can carry it, but it can't shoot accurately enough to be any use unless its on the ground"

Which does give it more mobility than 15 ft generally speaking. As always, ask your DM and build around whatever they rule.

[Smoothjedi]

I think this is just a DM call. Can a turrent mount a player? It's the same question on whether or not a gnome can mount a human (GET YOUR MIND OUT OF THE GUTTER). It's RAW, sure, but I haven't had a DM yet who would let me ride another player around like we're playing a game of chicken fight.

So many you convince your DM that you've made a special harness, hat, or mount on your shield that the turret can sit. I think that is cool, but in the end it is the whim of the DM. This is why I built my artillerist to avoid the level 5 ability and focus on something else (in my case, burning things with holy fire... and real fire too).

Similarly, the warforged wand sheath is 100% viable, albeit a little bit cheesy. I actually LIKE that my cleric had to work around these weird restrictions. It made the character feel more "right" early on. Sure I couldn't opportunity attack worth a damn (-1 STR and an improved weapon), but holy cow was he a monster on the front line. I certainly didn't feel hamstrung by it and it made a lot of interesting decision making. Unlike most front line fighters, I basically provided zero CC, so my position was all about maximizing my damage without risking instant death (which nearly happened several times because... how can you resist burning 4 enemies!).


All I know is it was one of the most fun characters I have played in a very long while, full of intersting in combat and out of combat decision. So much so that at level 4 I took Observant instead of war caster, giving a lot more legs to the RP and non-combat side of the character (also I had an odd wis score).


Yeah, I could see that, and I could see the DM letting you have the turret mount you with the regular rules. Or I could see a DM saying "You can carry it, but it can't shoot accurately enough to be any use unless its on the ground"

Which does give it more mobility than 15 ft generally speaking. As always, ask your DM and build around whatever they rule.

First off I don't really see the Wand Sheath + turret as cheesy, as it fits the setting. Warforged were specifically built for combat, and so it doesn't surprise me they'd have an option to have an edge over others with this set up. The fact it's using built in class features also makes it feel as it if were intended, not just some loophole to circumvent the rules.

After rereading the rules, I must concede that the mounting mechanic is not as viable as I originally thought. Specifically the rules state: "As part of the same bonus action, you can direct the cannon to walk or climb up to 15 feet to an unoccupied space, provided it has legs." (my emphasis) So, that means that if you want more movement, someone in the party will have pick it up and carry it. Perhaps it could latch on should a player put it on their shoulder. However, RAW states that it can't use its own movement to climb anyone.

[HappyDaze]

Although it probably is not using mounting rules, if it has a climb speed it shouldn't just fall off a vertical surface. Should that surface move, it would move with it, just like if it were up a tree and the tree moved. Therefore I don't think it's unreasonable that if it climbs a player, and that player moves, it would stay attached.

I don't think a climbing speed gives any special ability to move onto/with creatures. A Tabaxi cannot piggyback on another character for extra movement (outside using the mount rules, if appropriate).

[MaxWilson]

Wand + turret may not be cheesy, but for non-Warforged Artificers it's kind of squicky to have a wand embedded itself in your flesh and popping out on demand like Wolverine's claws. : )

BTW, does anyone else find it unsettling that a human Artificer can attune a docent?

[HappyDaze]

BTW, does anyone else find it unsettling that a human Artificer can attune a docent?

It's a magic Ben Wa ball.

[samcifer]

Wand + turret may not be cheesy, but for non-Warforged Artificers it's kind of squicky to have a wand embedded itself in your flesh and popping out on demand like Wolverine's claws. : )


Artificer... The best there is at what he does.

[Smoothjedi]

I don't think a climbing speed gives any special ability to move onto/with creatures. A Tabaxi cannot piggyback on another character for extra movement (outside using the mount rules, if appropriate).

Well, I guess my point was is if the Tabaxi somehow got reduced to the size of small or tiny, then I think it should be possible to use their climb speed on a medium sized creature.
However, as noted above, RAW straight up rules this out for the turret regardless.

[MaxWilson]

Well, I guess my point was is if the Tabaxi somehow got reduced to the size of small or tiny, then I think it should be possible to use their climb speed on a medium sized creature.
However, as noted above, RAW straight up rules this out for the turret regardless.

No it doesn't. Climbing *never* lets you occupy an already-occupied space. Turrets work the same as creatures here except that turrets technically by RAW don't take opportunity attacks.

So climb a creature in an adjacent square. Either it works or it doesn't, probably doesn't, but if it doesn't work then it doesn't work for creatures either.

[Smoothjedi]

No it doesn't. Climbing *never* lets you occupy an already-occupied space. Turrets work the same as creatures here except that turrets technically by RAW don't take opportunity attacks.

So climb a creature in an adjacent square. Either it works or it doesn't, probably doesn't, but if it doesn't work then it doesn't work for creatures either.

I disagree with you here, but not entirely. It is possible to move through another creature's space if it is two sizes larger or more, and it is considered difficult terrain. However, you cannot end your movement in their square. Therefore, if the Tabaxi was shrunk to tiny size (not small as I initially said), he should be able to use his climb speed on a medium sized creature as long as he then jumped off to another space before his movement ended.

[stoutstien]

Couldn't you use the climbing on larger creature rules for climbing on cannon?

[Smoothjedi]

After rereading the rules, I must concede that the mounting mechanic is not as viable as I originally thought. Specifically the rules state: "As part of the same bonus action, you can direct the cannon to walk or climb up to 15 feet to an unoccupied space, provided it has legs." (my emphasis) So, that means that if you want more movement, someone in the party will have pick it up and carry it. Perhaps it could latch on should a player put it on their shoulder. However, RAW states that it can't use its own movement to climb anyone.


Couldn't you use the climbing on larger creature rules for climbing on cannon?

Good point, although I'm guessing you meant for the cannon to climb on a person. Out of the DMG, there are rules for climbing on creatures, however it takes grappling to do so. So that would work in the above example of the Tabaxi. However the turret doesn't appear to be able to make a grapple attack, so it seems like there's no option for shoulder mounted turrets after all.

[MaxWilson]

I disagree with you here, but not entirely. It is possible to move through another creature's space if it is two sizes larger or more, and it is considered difficult terrain. However, you cannot end your movement in their square. Therefore, if the Tabaxi was shrunk to tiny size (not small as I initially said), he should be able to use his climb speed on a medium sized creature as long as he then jumped off to another space before his movement ended.

Cannon uses the same rules except that it can move through anything, no matter the size. Cannon is definitely not more restricted than the Tabaxi, except for being slower.

[Smoothjedi]

Cannon uses the same rules except that it can move through anything, no matter the size. Cannon is definitely not more restricted than the Tabaxi, except for being slower.

Where does it say that the cannon can move through hostile creatures' squares uninhibited?

[stoutstien]

Good point, although I'm guessing you meant for the cannon to climb on a person. Out of the DMG, there are rules for climbing on creatures, however it takes grappling to do so. So that would work in the above example of the Tabaxi. However the turret doesn't appear to be able to make a grapple attack, so it seems like there's no option for shoulder mounted turrets after all.
I have liked the new book alot but the editing in general has left alot to be desired. Lot of Raw issues in general.

[AdAstra]

Doesn't mounting a willing creature just take half your speed? Stands to reason that if a turret can move, it can do things that use movement, like jump, get up from prone, or climb on surfaces.

Conversely, grappling requires an action or part of the Attack action on a creature with Extra Attack.


Actually it's not quite the same question since the turret is a magical object rather than a creature. IIRC, the rules for mounts call out creatures.The rules just say "you can mount a creature". By RAW, only a creature can be mounted. Nothing is said about who "you" can be.

[Smoothjedi]

Specifically the rules state: "As part of the same bonus action, you can direct the cannon to walk or climb up to 15 feet to an unoccupied space, provided it has legs." (my emphasis)


Doesn't mounting a willing creature just take half your speed? Stands to reason that if a turret can move, it can do things that use movement, like jump, get up from prone, or climb on surfaces.

Conversely, grappling requires an action or part of the Attack action on a creature with Extra Attack.

The rules just say "you can mount a creature". By RAW, only a creature can be mounted. Nothing is said about who "you" can be.

Perhaps normally, but as I mentioned earlier, it can only move to an unoccupied space, which should exclude mounting anyone.

[Sherlockpwns]

I love D&D because it is a place where a conversation starts with which sub class is better and ends with the rules of mounted combat for non pcs. A fantastic tangent!

I honestly didn't like the artificer when I read it in UA, but it has grown on me a lot since. A fair amount of variety in builds that are different from existing classes.

[AdAstra]

Perhaps normally, but as I mentioned earlier, it can only move to an unoccupied space, which should exclude mounting anyone.

There's also no indication RAW that you need to be inside another creature's space to mount it, nor that someone is inside the space of the creature they're mounted on. The turret could be like a barnacle space-wise. Attached to you, but still having its own space.

[stoutstien]

I love D&D because it is a place where a conversation starts with which sub class is better and ends with the rules of mounted combat for non pcs. A fantastic tangent!

I honestly didn't like the artificer when I read it in UA, but it has grown on me a lot since. A fair amount of variety in builds that are different from existing classes.

Wait until the writing of flash of genius comes out.

Overall the class is looks like it setting in a good spot. Better than the UA and Raw issues aside, looks good for first new class added.

[AdAstra]

Wait until the writing of flash of genius comes out.

Overall the class is looks like it setting in a good spot. Better than the UA and Raw issues aside, looks good for first new class added.

Oh yeah, that. What does everyone who's read it think? Does it go into effect before or after the roll?

[MaxWilson]

Wait until the writing of flash of genius comes out.

Yeah, the timing is really unclear. Oh well.

[Dork_Forge]

Oh yeah, that. What does everyone who's read it think? Does it go into effect before or after the roll?

The writings ambiguous but as a DM I'd allow it after roll has been seen and as a player I've had it allowed to use after I've seen the roll.

[MaxWilson]

Oh yeah, that. What does everyone who's read it think? Does it go into effect before or after the roll?

As DM I'll shrug and say it's either, your choice. It's not like advantage/disadvantage where you have to know in advance how you're rolling.

[stoutstien]

As DM I'll shrug and say it's either, your choice. It's not like advantage/disadvantage where you have to know in advance how you're rolling.

Agreed. Before/after roll but before pass or failure seems the most fair.

It being a fixed value makes counterspell users very happy.

[Smoothjedi]

There's also no indication RAW that you need to be inside another creature's space to mount it, nor that someone is inside the space of the creature they're mounted on. The turret could be like a barnacle space-wise. Attached to you, but still having its own space.

This feels very counter-intuitive, but it does just say you mount a target within 5 feet of you. I don't see anything indicating you're wrong!

[MaxWilson]

Where does it say that the cannon can move through hostile creatures' squares uninhibited?

The difficult terrain rules for creatures say that movement costs extra speed in difficult terrain, but a turret has no speed--it just moves up to 15' (to an unoccupied space) as part of your bonus action, similar to e.g. Spiritual Weapon. The difficult terrain rules don't apply, unless of course a DM rules that that's dumb and applies them anyway, as is their right.

[HappyDaze]

The difficult terrain rules for creatures say that movement costs extra speed in difficult terrain, but a turret has no speed--it just moves up to 15' (to an unoccupied space) as part of your bonus action, similar to e.g. Spiritual Weapon. The difficult terrain rules don't apply, unless of course a DM rules that that's dumb and applies them anyway, as is their right.

Using that interpretation, the movement of the cannon (or, more precisely, the artillerist's movement of the cannon) would not attract opportunity attacks, right?

[MaxWilson]

Using that interpretation, the movement of the cannon (or, more precisely, the artillerist's movement of the cannon) would not attract opportunity attacks, right?

Correct. Opportunity attacks are explicitly only for creatures.

But then, nothing about opportunity attacks in 5E makes sense, anyway. In what universe is it easier to exploit the defenses of an enemy who is cautiously backing away from you, weapons raised, than an enemy who is paralyzed and unable to move a muscle?

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Congrats everyone.

I now want to make a warforged artillerist. He's gonna be a Dalek, probably named Sec.

[samcifer]

congrats everyone.

I now want to make a warforged artillerist. He's gonna be a dalek, probably named sec.

"ex-terminate! Ex-terminate!!!"

[SpawnOfMorbo]

"ex-terminate! Ex-terminate!!!"

I might need to make him sassy, some Daleks are quite sassy.

https://i.redd.it/fzc3nc8z95x01.jpg