New Unearthed Arcana (Sub Classes 3)

[Tawmis]

https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/subclasses_part3

[Millstone85]

So, that armorer subclass for the artificer...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y63i2NR9-LE

[jaappleton]

Best Ranger subclass in the game and its nowhere near close. This is STUNNING. It is disgustingly good, I am legitimately floored as to how strong this thing is. I LOOOOOVE this.

This Artificer subclass is what I wanted the Battle Smith to be. Adore it. I can't even properly express how much I like this. And the INFUSIONS. Just auto-succeed with your Reaction on Concentration saves? Uh, YES PLEASE.

And the Druid. Pretty damn great. Love the use of Wild Shape, this is something I enjoyed with Spore Druid and I've wanted to see more of it. Pretty thematic, and unique. Casting Guiding Bolt seems... weird, but hey, more offensive spells on a Druid, I dig it.

This... This totally rules. I love it. I don't know what to do with my hands right now.

[Amechra]

Yeah, the Armorer looks pretty great, honestly. I like how it gives you extra Infusion "slots" - that's a pretty nice feature. My first impression, though, is that the Battlesmith is crying over in the corner because of this guy.

However, most of those infusions are a bit too much in my opinion. Spell-Refueling Ring in particular sets off warning bells in my head.

The Circle of Stars looks alright, I guess. The flavor is great, but the actual mechanics feel kinda boring.

Fey Wanderer, on the other hand... is this is the first time we've actually gotten a damage-boosting feature that supports using two-weapon fighting with it? Happy days! Sure, you have to spread the damage around to get the most of it, but it's a step forward. Oh, and you get a Smite feature, tons of support for making a social Ranger, and a crazy capstone.

[Dragonmuncher]

Oh damn, that "Armor Modifications" ability for the Armorer is pretty awesome. Understated, but awesome.

[jaappleton]

Yeah, the Armorer looks pretty great, honestly. I like how it gives you extra Infusion "slots" - that's a pretty nice feature. My first impression, though, is that the Battlesmith is crying over in the corner because of this guy.

However, most of those infusions are a bit too much in my opinion. Spell-Refueling Ring in particular sets off warning bells in my head.

The Circle of Stars looks alright, I guess. The flavor is great, but the actual mechanics feel kinda boring.

Fey Wanderer, on the other hand... is this is the first time we've actually gotten a damage-boosting feature that supports using two-weapon fighting with it? Happy days! Sure, you have to spread the damage around to get the most of it, but it's a step forward. Oh, and you get a Smite feature, tons of support for making a social Ranger, and a crazy capstone.

SMITE. RANGER.

That alone makes it far and away my favorite Conclave.

[Ravinsild]

The Fey Ranger is everything I've wanted and more. Now we just need a fairy race and I'm set. Although I'll take Eladrin for now.

[CheddarChampion]

I don't like the Armorer. IMO power armor is removed from the fantasy genre to the point it would break my immersion.
The Mind Sharpener infusion is too strong (should have limited uses) and is flavored oddly. When you're in shock from pain and stop concentrating for a moment, it shocks your mind more to clear it? Huh?
Cosmic Omen is pretty good stuff: Woe lets you reduce a creature's saving throw roll!

Now we can make a Paladin/Blade Pact Warlock/Fey Wanderer and smite when we smite while we smite.

[jaappleton]

I don't like the Armorer. IMO power armor is removed from the fantasy genre to the point it would break my immersion.
The Mind Sharpener infusion is too strong (should have limited uses) and is flavored oddly. When you're in shock from pain and stop concentrating for a moment, it shocks your mind more to clear it? Huh?

I can see Armorer being a bit too much 'tech', especially for low magic settings.

Gandalf, Legolas, and Iron Gnome is a bit weird for a party, I admit that.

But Eberron is quite high-magic.

I expect it also depends a lot as to how you flavor the armor. Iron Man is one thing, but a borderline sentient suit of armor from an ancient mage could be quite fun to play with.

[CheddarChampion]

I expect it also depends a lot as to how you flavor the armor. Iron Man is one thing, but a borderline sentient suit of armor from an ancient mage could be quite fun to play with.

Fair point.

[JumboWheat01]

Fey Ranger is definitely an "Oh, my~!" kind of thing. Bonus damage that works with two-weapon fighting, smiting with a rider, social bonuses when needed, and the ability to make something pretty much ignore you for a day. It's just so bloody tasty. I'll admit, this Ranger just plain seems too good compared to others, but as this is the Ranger class we're talking about, I don't feel so bad about that.

The Druid looks fun and tickles my astronomy interest. Perhaps not the strongest looking thing, but thematic feeling.

[stoutstien]

I like the idea of the armorer but it would need to be toned back.
The spells alone are enough to give me pause. Magic missile + SSI is iffy.

[CheddarChampion]

An Ancients Paladin, an Archfey Warlock, a Fey Wanderer Ranger, and a Twilight Druid walk into a tavern...
Could be a fun campaign!

[micahaphone]

The Armorer artificer seems to be the best parts of the battlesmith and artillerist in one package.

The stars druid seems very strong, like there's never a reason not to be in starry form when in a fight. You get 2/SR, after all. And multiple free Guiding Bolts a day? This seems to almost be a better version of the Land Druid's recovery.


I agree that Fey Druid is strong, I also like that they recognized (finally!) that dual-wielding ranger is iconic yet janky in action economy, so if you dual wield you can still turn on your "every turn do this" free hunters mark.

[Nidgit]

It's Iron Man time! Guardian Armorer is insanely good- you essentially have a massive passive regen going all the time at the cost of a bonus action, plus abilities to make enemies target you. Definitely an overpowered tank. Infiltrator looks significantly weaker in comparison- the level 15 ability is neat but it's still not very much damage. Mind Sharpener is also obscenely good and needs some kind of nerf to offset its immediate availability.

Circle of Stars sounds extremely cool and is pretty ok in practice. Dragon Form is amazing early on but will fall off eventually, so I'd probably go Chalice at higher levels. Archer is the weakest of the 3 except at Tier 1 play. Star Flare is neat but should be save for half damage instead of no effect. Don't have many problems with this overall.

Fey Wanderer is another weird Ranger. I don't like so many abilities involving fear/charm, but at least it oftens provides a straight damage alternative. I'm not sure how I feel about Dreadful Strikes- sure you can use it for two-handed fighting, but it still only applies once per enemy. This feels like a step in the right direction for a Ranger but doesn't really hot the mark for me. Misty Presence is undeniably awesome though.

[DarknessEternal]

Fey Wanderer, on the other hand... is this is the first time we've actually gotten a damage-boosting feature that supports using two-weapon fighting with it?

Yeah, but not really. It's once per round.

[jaappleton]

Yeah, but not really. It's once per round.

It also automatically makes your weapons magical.

That alone is borderline insanity. A bit campaign dependent, sure, but in something like Avernus where it’s full of fiends with resistance to non-magical weapons?

It instantly jumps to gold-tier, if we’re talking Handbook terms. Compare that to Devotion Paladin, which can use its Channel Divinity to make a weapon magical and give +Cha Mod to attack rolls for a minute.

It’s a damn good ability. Yes, the +1d6 damage is limited to once per turn, but you also never have to worry about Resistance. And at 7 you can Smite once per turn.

As far as Ranger strength levels are concerned, this is damn near top of the list. Possibly at the very top.

[CheddarChampion]

If you use FW's DS with dual wielding, wouldn't it activate after the attack action? If so, DS would only make the one bonus attack count as magical.
Probably not RAI but it seems RAW to me.

[jas61292]

It also automatically makes your weapons magical.

Yes, this is very good for a low level feature.

That said, one kinda odd thing to note is that if you are two weapon fighting, you may activate it with the TWF bonus action. But because the TWF bonus action requires you to first make an attack with your action, your first attack will never be magical if you TWF. And if you are trying to spread around your hits to maximize total damage, you can't get any extra psychic damage from TWF.

Sadly, this means that while the feature was clearly designed to work with the TWF style, and does not totally conflict with it, it's best bonuses can't be used to their fullest extent with that style.

[P. G. Macer]

Ouch, good catch. That really takes the wind out my sails.

To be honest, WotC wrote themselves into a corner with their TWF rules. I understand what they were trying to get at with this feature, but RAW it seems to fall flat.

[Belac93]

TWF is balanced if you change 'use your bonus action' to 'once per round on your turn.' I've been using it for my games and it's perfect.

[Kane0]

Iron Man Artificer. Can't say it wasn't anticipated.

Tools of the Trade: Yep, all good
Armorer spells: Very potent spread of spells there, even on a half caster
Power Armor: Doesn't actually automatically give you a certain set of armor which is nice, no getting free full plate in games where that wouldn't fit. Solid feature.
Armor Model: We're copying the same stat-to damage mistake that the Hexblade made. Please don't do that. This feature also makes level 3 very busy with very strong and versatile features. Guardian especially looks strong, though I'll leave it to playtesting to show how strong.
Extra Attack: Nothing to see here
Armor modifications: This is a mermaid problem, I don't see anywhere previously where I couldn't enchant my boots without affecting my heavy armor. The extra infusion slots just for your armor is solid enough.
Perfected armor: Guardian's Pull 'within 5 feet' instead of 'within your reach' is a small thing that always annoys me. Otherwise this seems fine
Infusions: Mind Sharpener is incredibly strong and needs a pre-req or nerf, the rest seem fine

overall impression: Will probably need some tweaking (the traditional UA toning back) but it's solid. I feel sort of conflicted thinking of artificers that want to be more than one gimmick with this subclass, or other subclasses that want to incorporate the enchanted armor concept. At least some infusions help with that.

Star Druid
Star Map: Pretty good, I like it although that said 3-5 extra Guiding Bolts at level 2 is huge. But it's comparing to moon druid so okay
Starry Form: You can wildshape into a glowstick, for some reason that just makes me giggle. Thank god you don't have 12 starsigns to choose from.
Cosmic Omen: Neat and solid, reminds me of that fortune bard homebrew. Which is really good by the way, go look it up.
Full of Stars: But can't phase through stuff? Missed opportunity there.
Star Fire: The teleport could be worded better, took me three reads to figure out that you aren't shuffling people around within the AoE but moving them up to 30' away from the 30' area. The damage is low, but at least it has two riders and a recharge.

overall impression: This is pretty good, I like it. If we had a season druid and a star druid in the next big subclass book that would round out the druid really well.

Fey Ranger
Fey wanderer: We have seen this fluff before. I don't like repeats.
Fey magic: oh look, more free spells while the players handbook subclasses get ignored. It's lovely that you guys have recognised this issue, now do you mind addressing it in a way that doesn't make your own core +1 rule even harder to work with?
Cunning will: functional if boring.
Dreadful strikes: Again we're overloading the first level breakpoint, this is a consistent pattern lately. This also is just a way to deal with the hunter's mark and TWF problems. Great for THIS subclass, but what about all the others? Don't fix these things with subclasses!
Blessing of the courts: It's a smite for the ranger.
Beguiling twist: This is neat, it works with your allies' attempts to charm/frighten as well as your own.
Misty presence: A proper stealth feature. It's good, I like it.

overall impression: The fluff is a paper-thin cover to the mechanical fixes this subclass seeks to introduce. This is treating symptoms, not the cause.

[micahaphone]

One important note for the new ranger BA buff: it applies only once per creature per turn, not once per turn. So TWF still gets the buff if you're in the middle of a bunch of enemies.

Still disappointing, I agree, but it is technically possible to get the bonus damage on all your attacks if you're in the thick of it.

[ProsecutorGodot]

The fey ranger is all well and good, but it gets into some fiddly rules territory even though it's gone out of its way to try and allow TWF. Since the bonus action used for TWF is predicated on taking the attack action and having attacked with a light melee weapon already, your first strike can't benefit from Dreadful strikes. It's just a bit weird.

Overall, the subclasses look strong, I'm just not very enthused with the flavor personally. The artificer subclass specifically is just so... extra, and over the top. I think with minor tweaking it could be tailored into a cyrborg/magitech style fusion of man and machine that I would appreciate the flavor of more.

[jaappleton]

A very good catch on that, regarding Dreadful Strikes and the order in which TWF occurs.

I’ve brought it up to the design team via Twitter. As per usual, I’ll report back if I hear anything.

I CAN clarify something that I thought of: Power Armor says it encompasses your whole body. It doesn’t prevent any sort of flight, swim speed, climb speed, etc.

Sooooo go ahead and make Vulture from Spider Man!

[Makorel]

I am perhaps too surprised that we're actually getting more Artificer subclasses now. I guess there was a part of me that thought maybe they wouldn't support it since it's not in the phb. But anyway...

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/risk-of-rain/images/4/42/Loader%28RoR2%29.png/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/319?cb=20190918032708

We Loadin' now boys.

Seriously this just has to confirm someone on the staff plays Risk of Rain. when I first saw the Artillerist and their turrets I thought to myself "gee this sounds a lot like the Engineer from Risk of Rain. What a coincidence!"

Now I see this Armorer and I think to myself "Gee this sounds a lot like the Loader from Risk of Rain. This can't be a coincidence!"

Both this subclass and the Loader have giant punch gauntlets and a barrier effect. The "Pulling Force" of the 15th level ability does basically the same thing as the Loader's grappling hook. I suppose the infiltrator's lightning blast could be construed as the Loader's tesla coil but really it's more like Iron Man's hand blasters, although it's odd they went with lightning damage as I always thought Iron Man's Iron Blasts were more radiant or even force.

The Druid subclass is something I would expect out of a Wizard subclass. I feel like a Wizard would be more like to explore astrological zodiac mumbo jumbo but I would expect a Star themed Druid to be more about cosmic machinery, like the pulling of the tides by the moon or dealing with star power or gravity like that Graviturgist class in that new critical role book (but then I guess we have the Graviturgist for that). Like the Druid should focus on the natural forces of the world instead of some nonsense hocus pocus which is clearly the Wizard's wheelhouse.

The Fey Ranger just seems really solid all around. Most Ranger subclasses are quite a bit less solid than this by my reckoning. Advantage to stave off charms and fears are a nice defensive benefit without simply adding on AC, deft strike isn't super flashy but two-weapon fighting support and not having to concentrate is nice I suppose. And I'm surprised at how okay I am with just...giving Ranger smites. Just give Ranger smites. **** that was the answer all along wasn't it? These don't even scale but with all the little fiddly bits of Ranger (Hunter's Mark, Two-Weapon Fighting for another chance to smite, this subclass's own bonus action d6) just having them at all means the Paladin doesn't outpace quite so hard. They even give you a fear/charm freebie to make it a bit more powerful and different at the same time.

Definitely like this UA more than I dislike it. Would like to see the angle of the Star Druid changed but I wouldn't be too salty if they kept it as is.

[jaappleton]

I especially love how the Fey Wanderer gets a Smite at 7, which can cause the enemy to Fear you.

This interaction with their lv11 feature is very, very solid.

Now, note the lv11 feature. Whenever any creature succeeds on a Charm or Fear save. So if you’re with, say, a Conquest Paladin.... you’re quite a formidable duo.

Of course you could try to get spells like Cause Fear (a lv1 spell) or Fear (lv3) on your list. So you can at worst use your Reaction to deal 3d10 Psychic. Not bad, not bad.

[Waterdeep Merch]

That ranger is liable to get hit by the mother of all nerf bats, and that's too bad. I think if the other ranger subclasses were about this strong, people wouldn't be complaining about the ranger. Even with smites, it defines itself differently enough from how a paladin plays while still being useful and good in a fight. This really should be the standard.

[Kane0]

That ranger is liable to get hit by the mother of all nerf bats, and that's too bad. I think if the other ranger subclasses were Ranger was about this strong, people wouldn't be complaining about the ranger. Even with smites, it defines itself differently enough from how a paladin plays while still being useful and good in a fight. This really should be the standard.

Fixed that for you :smallwink:

[Millstone85]

An Ancients Paladin, an Archfey Warlock, a Fey Wanderer Ranger, and a Twilight Druid walk into a tavern...
Could be a fun campaign!And of course, they were all brought into that tavern by the song of a Glamour Bard.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Fixed that for you :smallwink:

It would help, but if they're adamant on never fixing the chassis, fixing the subclasses would be nice.

I'm a fan of subclasses that redefine how you fight. It would be pretty cool if each one had it's own niche.

I mean a niche that isn't terrible, beastmaster, put your hand down.

[Sigreid]

Reading the 9th level armorer feature and taking the words at face vaule it seems at 9th level you can infuse the enhanced protection bonus on your armor multiple times. This would mean, again at face value your armor could give you up to a +12 over the armor's base AC, so 30 ac, potentially. They might want to take another crack at that wording.

[Kane0]

It would help, but if they're adamant on never fixing the chassis, fixing the subclasses would be nice.

I'm a fan of subclasses that redefine how you fight. It would be pretty cool if each one had it's own niche.

I mean a niche that isn't terrible, beastmaster, put your hand down.

In a way, they are adamant. Ranger has popped up a *lot* in UA, so they care on some level. They just refuse to roll up their sleeves and fix the root of the problem, the things written in the PHB. Gives me Hexblade flashbacks to be honest.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Of the three, the Star Druids seem most playable/useful. Very solid mechanics and interesting flavor.

The Armorer Artificer would be alright if it weren't for the unpardonable sin of making them a SAD gish like the Hexblade. You'd think WOTC's designers would have learned their lesson from THAT abomination already! I don't allow SAD classes like this at my table - I had to nerf the Hexblade - so this one's a no-go, and if it becomes official in this form it'll get the same treatment.

And I really, really want to like the Fey Ranger, but how in the holy living **** is a charisma based Ranger supposed to WORK??? Has anyone at WOTC played a Ranger, ever? And do they know Charisma is, in fact, a dump stat for Rangers? Full stop. There's no way to effectively play one of these using point buy or standard array; it's entirely down to the "roll 4d6 and pray" method.

[JumboWheat01]

And I really, really want to like the Fey Ranger, but how in the holy living **** is a charisma based Ranger supposed to WORK??? Has anyone at WOTC played a Ranger, ever? And do they know Charisma is, in fact, a dump stat for Rangers? Full stop. There's no way to effectively play one of these using point buy or standard array; it's entirely down to the "roll 4d6 and pray" method.

At level 7 they get a bonus to ANY Charisma check based on their Wisdom, which a Ranger should at least have a decent score in. It's not just a Deception or Persuade roll that they happen to be proficient in, ANY Charisma check. So you don't really need to boost up Wisdom all that much. A 10 would at least let you always receive a bonus from your Wisdom instead of taken away a point.

[ProsecutorGodot]

And I really, really want to like the Fey Ranger, but how in the holy living **** is a charisma based Ranger supposed to WORK??? Has anyone at WOTC played a Ranger, ever? And do they know Charisma is, in fact, a dump stat for Rangers? Full stop. There's no way to effectively play one of these using point buy or standard array; it's entirely down to the "roll 4d6 and pray" method.

I don't understand what you mean, it uses wisdom for all of it's things as usual and eventually adds your wisdom modifier to all charisma checks. At that point you can use your wisdom as if you hadn't dumped charisma, or in the case that you've rolled fortunately on stats, you're the new party face with a huge charisma bonus on top of it.


At level 7 they get a bonus to ANY Charisma check based on their Wisdom, which a Ranger should at least have a decent score in. It's not just a Deception or Persuade roll that they happen to be proficient in, ANY Charisma check. So you don't really need to boost up Wisdom all that much. A 10 would at least let you always receive a bonus from your Wisdom instead of taken away a point.
It doesn't say "minimum of one" here so you'd need at least a 12 in Wisdom to gain any benefit from it.

[stoutstien]

Of the three, the Star Druids seem most playable/useful. Very solid mechanics and interesting flavor.

The Armorer Artificer would be alright if it weren't for the unpardonable sin of making them a SAD gish like the Hexblade. You'd think WOTC's designers would have learned their lesson from THAT abomination already! I don't allow SAD classes like this at my table - I had to nerf the Hexblade - so this one's a no-go, and if it becomes official in this form it'll get the same treatment.

And I really, really want to like the Fey Ranger, but how in the holy living **** is a charisma based Ranger supposed to WORK??? Has anyone at WOTC played a Ranger, ever? And do they know Charisma is, in fact, a dump stat for Rangers? Full stop. There's no way to effectively play one of these using point buy or standard array; it's entirely down to the "roll 4d6 and pray" method.

Big difference between Hexblade getting SaD at lv 1 and Cha crossing over into 3 other front loaded classes and the armor smith getting it at lv 3 with limited multiclass options.
At first glance the armor smith looks OP but other than the spell list it lacks the flexibility that the other Subclasses get.

Mirror image + SSI Is probably a bad idea.

[JumboWheat01]

It doesn't say "minimum of one" here so you'd need at least a 12 in Wisdom to gain any benefit from it.

I meant 10 in Charisma to avoid penalties, but yeah, it is interesting that it doesn't have a "minimum of one" note.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I meant 10 in Charisma to avoid penalties, but yeah, it is interesting that it doesn't have a "minimum of one" note.

It's a bit shoehorned in, they clearly wanted this ranger to be charismatic in some way but understood that you'll rarely (if ever) manage having a decent score there so they threw you a bone to make this a decent option.

Another fun thing is that it also doesn't say "you can gain a bonus", you just do. That means if you've rolled a socially awkward dunderhead of a Ranger (why you would is a separate issue) you can actually be even worse at these checks, with an additional negative penalty.

[bendking]

Frankly, I just like this one. The Artificer and Ranger sub-classes are a bit on the strong side but I don't really mind considering the base classes aren't that strong to begin with.

[Evaar]

This is the first time in 5e that I've really wanted to play a Ranger.

The other ranger subclasses would sometimes make me think "Huh, I bet I can figure out a way for that to work." This one just works. I just want it. I want to do it. I want that one. Mom! Mom, get me that one.

[Arkhios]

Starry Form, where have I seen this before...

OH, RIGHT. The game I still play after 15 years since its release:


https://i.imgur.com/fNlC0tG.png
Kul Tiran Human Balance Druid with Glyph of Stars (not mine, though).

Wouldn't say that it's exactly unique, per sé (see spoiler, below), but it's unique in D&D so far, at the very least.

In World of Warcraft, Balance Druids draw their powers from the sun, the moon, and the stars, and their abilities are very similar to the Circle of Stars in this UA. Not saying it's a bad thing. Just saying it's a thing elsewhere.

THAT SAID, I absolutely love this Circle. I've been neglecting even building a druid for theorycrafting purposes for a long time, but Circle of the Stars makes me want to play a druid for the first time in 5th edition.

Regarding Armorer/Tony Stark/Iron Man allegory. My first thoughts exactly. Can't say I hate this, conceptually, but it's a little bit front-loaded and is likely to take a severe nerf-hammering. The concept is beyond cool, though.

Fey Wanderer is, as has been pointed out several times already, perhaps the best addition for dual-wielding rangers in a very long time (read: never before! ...or at least I don't remember another as clearly two-weapon fighter-ish ranger subclass as this)

[Citadel97501]

Anyone else noticing that those 2 extra slots for Infusion make persistant flight a real thing? 8 hours of flight with a back up pair of Winged Boots at level 10? I posted a thread about it, but I thought adding it here also makes a lot of sense?

[Dork_Forge]

Anyone else noticing that those 2 extra slots for Infusion make persistant flight a real thing? 8 hours of flight with a back up pair of Winged Boots at level 10? I posted a thread about it, but I thought adding it here also makes a lot of sense?

It increases the maximum number of infused items but it doesn't say that you can have more than one of the same infusion. You just get to have more infusions for your armor without taking away from your overall Artificeryness, still just the one pair of boots.

[Arkhios]

Another fun thing is that it also doesn't say "you can gain a bonus", you just do. That means if you've rolled a socially awkward dunderhead of a Ranger (why you would is a separate issue) you can actually be even worse at these checks, with an additional negative penalty.

Which, again, makes sense. If you're such an oaf with the social perceptiveness and aptitude of a rock, you're hardly going to influence anyone by words or general demeanor.

[Citadel97501]

It increases the maximum number of infused items but it doesn't say that you can have more than one of the same infusion. You just get to have more infusions for your armor without taking away from your overall Artificeryness, still just the one pair of boots.

I am not talking about using your bonus slots, just having 2 sets of boots with your normal slots.

Edit: Nevermind this completely fails due to not being able to make duplicates even on different objects, I missed that. This wrecks a lot of support artificers handying out a lot of the same item to a party :( so no matter what you want I guess your supposed to be selfish on them.

I do find it really interesting how well this new subclass would work as a multi-class with Tempest Cleric, kind of weird stat line up but eminetly doable.
-While the 1st level ability works pretty well with the Guardian stuff as well, establishing a catch 22. Hit me and get knocked on your ass, or get disadvantage and then get attacked with the Sentinel feat.

-6 levels of Tempest Cleric gets you a really nasty push effect for blasting Infiltrators, which could be just nasty for zone control.

[Lord Vukodlak]

An Ancients Paladin, an Archfey Warlock, a Fey Wanderer Ranger, and a Twilight Druid walk into a tavern...
Could be a fun campaign!
And yet sorcerers STILL don't have a fey-bloodline....



Fey magic: oh look, more free spells while the players handbook subclasses get ignored. It's lovely that you guys have recognized this issue, now do you mind addressing it in a way that doesn't make your own core +1 rule even harder to work with?
That's adventures league wizards has 0% to do with it.

[Arkhios]

That's adventures league wizards has 0% to do with it.

Actually, wizards has at least 50% to do with it, because Adventurer's League runs under Wizards of the Coast supervision.

[ThePolarBear]

A very good catch on that, regarding Dreadful Strikes and the order in which TWF occurs.

I’ve brought it up to the design team via Twitter. As per usual, I’ll report back if I hear anything.

Honestly i think it is "ok" the way it is right now. It affects the same number of attacks for every style. Even if it was unintentional, it is certainly a design space that should be explored more.

Essentially it "fixes" the double requirement BA on Ranger Features when the Ranger uses TWF without making it unbalanced in number of activations over other, different options.

[JakOfAllTirades]

After giving all of this a second look, I'm somewhat less put off. The Armorer only gets to use INT for attacks/damage with the special weapons built into its armor. This is a huge improvement on the overpowering SAD-ness of the Hexblade.

And as others have noted, the Fey Ranger gets to use Wis where other classes would rely solely on Cha. I skimmed over the doc too quickly the first time, as I'm prone to doing on workdays. And now I'm off to bed....

[suplee215]

I honesty think that the Armorer can work in any fantasy setting. Iron Man allusions besides, you don't need to look far in fantasy to find magic armor. Just need to focus on those elements a little bit more. I get more The Destroyer vibe from The Guardian as well.

[Mikal]

I’m digging the artificer. It’s actually built in a way that would make me want to play one.

Max int and get a good con, maybe wis. Take sharpshooter for infiltrator armor mode and sentinel for guardian armor mode and have fun all the way as I blast everyone with magitekincal might!

Edit: also dual wielder so I can hit three times with my guardian fists and get a little extra AC

[jaappleton]

Myself, when I make a caster, I like to go with thematic builds. My spell selections often reflect that. If I'm a Storm Mage, you can expect lots of thunder and lightning.

One build I've been weighing heavily over the past.... Oh, maybe the last year or so, has been a Radiant caster.

Radiant is one of the best damage types in the game, that's far from a secret. Seldom resisted and a decent selection of spells which support it.

The issue has always been that the spells which support it are fairly spread out across the classes.

Clerics got Guiding Bolt, but Druids got Moonbeam, but Clerics got Spirit Guardians though that's only close range. Wizards, Sorcs and Warlocks got Sickening Radiance, but none of the earlier level spells (save Divine Soul), and Clerics don't get Sunbeam-

Enter Stars Druid.

And its damn near perfect for this. Guiding Bolt a number of times equal to Wisdom mod, Moonbeam, Dawn (with the Class Variant UA), Sunbeam, plus the ability to use Archer Form for essentially Radiant Spiritual Weapon. Its pretty darn good for this. Plus, of course, healing and the other Druid spells.

[Burley]

Reading the 9th level armorer feature and taking the words at face vaule it seems at 9th level you can infuse the enhanced protection bonus on your armor multiple times. This would mean, again at face value your armor could give you up to a +12 over the armor's base AC, so 30 ac, potentially. They might want to take another crack at that wording.

Except that the BIG rule of D&D is that bonuses from the same source don't stack.
Also, you can't use the same infusion on more than one thing at a time (which is described in the Artificer's vanilla class description).


It can let you hit your armor with multiple infusions, letting you hit the helmet, gauntlets and junk, even thought they're TECHNICALLY a part of the same slot as your Armor. But, looking over it, this is just fluff. A DM would probably let you hit each of these, anyway, if you wanna waste all of your infusions on yourself.
I think being able to do an infusion on your fighter and one one yourself is the REAL power of this ability. You can only do 1 new infusion per long rest, and being able to swap 2 per long rest is important to your versatility and party impact.

[Ravinsild]

Myself, when I make a caster, I like to go with thematic builds. My spell selections often reflect that. If I'm a Storm Mage, you can expect lots of thunder and lightning.

One build I've been weighing heavily over the past.... Oh, maybe the last year or so, has been a Radiant caster.

Radiant is one of the best damage types in the game, that's far from a secret. Seldom resisted and a decent selection of spells which support it.

The issue has always been that the spells which support it are fairly spread out across the classes.

Clerics got Guiding Bolt, but Druids got Moonbeam, but Clerics got Spirit Guardians though that's only close range. Wizards, Sorcs and Warlocks got Sickening Radiance, but none of the earlier level spells (save Divine Soul), and Clerics don't get Sunbeam-

Enter Stars Druid.

And its damn near perfect for this. Guiding Bolt a number of times equal to Wisdom mod, Moonbeam, Dawn (with the Class Variant UA), Sunbeam, plus the ability to use Archer Form for essentially Radiant Spiritual Weapon. Its pretty darn good for this. Plus, of course, healing and the other Druid spells.

You and me both. I can't really play generalist wizards. I like to play "fire mage" "frost mage" etc.

[Sigreid]

Except that the BIG rule of D&D is that bonuses from the same source don't stack.
Also, you can't use the same infusion on more than one thing at a time (which is described in the Artificer's vanilla class description).


It can let you hit your armor with multiple infusions, letting you hit the helmet, gauntlets and junk, even thought they're TECHNICALLY a part of the same slot as your Armor. But, looking over it, this is just fluff. A DM would probably let you hit each of these, anyway, if you wanna waste all of your infusions on yourself.
I think being able to do an infusion on your fighter and one one yourself is the REAL power of this ability. You can only do 1 new infusion per long rest, and being able to swap 2 per long rest is important to your versatility and party impact.

Thanks, I missed the only one infusion of each type thing.

[Dork_Forge]

Armor Model: We're copying the same stat-to damage mistake that the Hexblade made. Please don't do that. This feature also makes level 3 very busy with very strong and versatile features. Guardian especially looks strong, though I'll leave it to playtesting to show how strong.


I'm curious why you think this is a mistake akin to the Hexblade? It already exists in the Battle Smith and is locked behind a 3 level dip, even then it's restricted to your armor weapons (which don't scale) and has some basis in fluff rather than a misguided patch for a core class feature (not to mention the issue of Cha being so multiclassing friendly).

In the UA as a whole I really like the Armorer as is, I think the Mind Sharpener needs a usage limit though, once per short or long rest seems enough to make it a worthwhile item still. I like the Ragner but the TWF clause of their bonus damage needs to be fixed, my biggest issue to be honest is the Star Map that lets you cast Guiding Bolt for free up to 5 times a day.

[suplee215]

What fixes do people think the Armorer needs? Only one I can really see is scaling down the temp HP to half the level. While I do think the INT to attack can make it super powerful, I don't think it's too much (out performing the Battle Smith not withstanding).

[stoutstien]

What fixes do people think the Armorer needs? Only one I can really see is scaling down the temp HP to half the level. While I do think the INT to attack can make it super powerful, I don't think it's too much (out performing the Battle Smith not withstanding).

Clean up text across the board.

Spell list needs to be redone. It's both unfocused and a tad strong.

The THP probably needs a buff but instead of it being at-will, allow it free once a LR and then spend a spell slot to repeat it. Same for stealth armor mini smite. Maybe LV + 2x int mod for THP and have the lighting attack scale like sneak attack.

Scale the additional infusions at lv 9 back to one and get the second one at 15. Add them as additional infusions know as well.

All I got so far.

[suplee215]

Clean up text across the board.

Spell list needs to be redone. It's both unfocused and a tad strong.

The THP probably needs a buff but instead of it being at-will, allow it free once a LR and then spend a spell slot to repeat it. Same for stealth armor mini smite. Maybe LV + 2x int mod for THP and have the lighting attack scale like sneak attack.

Scale the additional infusions at lv 9 back to one and get the second one at 15. Add them as additional infusions know as well.

All I got so far.

Interesting that you are making the THP totally different than I was seeing it. I saw it as too much for something every turn but want to limit it whereas you are making it less a free action. I think the goal of that ability and that armor is make a solid tank, and with a 1d8 hit dice I think temp hit points each turn for a bonus action works. Reminds me a lot of the Battle Rager THP, but should be a little higher IMO because it isn't using a barbarian chasis. I do think the lightning glauntet can use some help on damage though.

[stoutstien]

Interesting that you are making the THP totally different than I was seeing it. I saw it as too much for something every turn but want to limit it whereas you are making it less a free action. I think the goal of that ability and that armor is make a solid tank, and with a 1d8 hit dice I think temp hit points each turn for a bonus action works. Reminds me a lot of the Battle Rager THP, but should be a little higher IMO because it isn't using a barbarian chasis. I do think the lightning glauntet can use some help on damage though.

The problem I have with that is the repeatable temporary hit point trick is already covered by the artillerist. It's also party-wide +.
Maybe if there was some way for them to share it? if anything the armorsmith makes more sense with the battle Smith spell less than the battle Smith itself. This screams warding bond to me. all the smite spells are still crap but they're less crappy on the armorsmith than the battle Smith.

[KorvinStarmast]

overall impression: The fluff is a paper-thin cover to the mechanical fixes this subclass seeks to introduce. This is treating symptoms, not the cause. The PHB rangers just getting the additional spells like the XGTE would be an easy and modest fix.
And: Rangers prepare spells. They are divine casters.
ARRRGGHHH!.

[Daphne]

What fixes do people think the Armorer needs? Only one I can really see is scaling down the temp HP to half the level.

I think it should be INT mod.

[jaappleton]

What is everyone’s thoughts on the Ranger’s ability to essentially smite, from Blessings of the Courts?

At first it seems pretty great. And it does work on ranged attacks, which is super cool.

But it doesn’t scale at all. I mean, spending a 2nd level slot on it I suppose I could live with when facing a rather tough foe, but I don’t think I could justify a third level slot.

Anyone think it should scale?

[TIPOT]

A human fey ranger 7/samurai 7 could possibly be the best diplomat about with a possible +25 to persuade checks without items.

[Ravinsild]

What is everyone’s thoughts on the Ranger’s ability to essentially smite, from Blessings of the Courts?

At first it seems pretty great. And it does work on ranged attacks, which is super cool.

But it doesn’t scale at all. I mean, spending a 2nd level slot on it I suppose I could live with when facing a rather tough foe, but I don’t think I could justify a third level slot.

Anyone think it should scale?

Not really. If you're using a longbow or crossbow with XBE you're getting two attacks, plus hunter's mark so like 1d8+X + 1d6 + 1d8+X + 1d6 already. That's fairly hefty on top of Dreadful Strikes for another +1d6 (per attack). So in total it's like 1d8+x(longbow+modifier) + 1d6(Hunter's mark) + 1d8+x(longbow+modifier) + 1d6 (hunter's mark) + 1d6 (Dreadful Strikes) + 1d6 (Dreadful Strikes) +3d6 (Blessings of the Courts).

I think it stacks up pretty good and can be consistent.

[Kane0]

Not really. If you're using a longbow or crossbow with XBE you're getting two attacks, plus hunter's mark so like 1d8+X + 1d6 + 1d8+X + 1d6 already. That's fairly hefty on top of Dreadful Strikes for another +1d6 (per attack). So in total it's like 1d8+x(longbow+modifier) + 1d6(Hunter's mark) + 1d8+x(longbow+modifier) + 1d6 (hunter's mark) + 1d6 (Dreadful Strikes) + 1d6 (Dreadful Strikes) +3d6 (Blessings of the Courts).

I think it stacks up pretty good and can be consistent.

You're doubling up bonus actions there.


I'm curious why you think this is a mistake akin to the Hexblade? It already exists in the Battle Smith and is locked behind a 3 level dip, even then it's restricted to your armor weapons (which don't scale) and has some basis in fluff rather than a misguided patch for a core class feature (not to mention the issue of Cha being so multiclassing friendly).

In the UA as a whole I really like the Armorer as is, I think the Mind Sharpener needs a usage limit though, once per short or long rest seems enough to make it a worthwhile item still. I like the Ragner but the TWF clause of their bonus damage needs to be fixed, my biggest issue to be honest is the Star Map that lets you cast Guiding Bolt for free up to 5 times a day.

For context, I wasn't thrilled about it there either:

https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=23910129&postcount=38


- 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.



I think the armor attacks that basically work like cantrips is good, a far sight better than previous implementations of casting-stat to attack & damage. To me the difference between level 1 and level 3 is marginal unless we're talking multiclassing, and if we are then the Int classes of Wiz/Art/Blood (+AT and EK) are getting close to the Cha combos Bard/Sorc/Lock/Pally and the gap will likely continue to close in future.
Maybe just color me cautious and a bit wary since the last time it happened.

[Ravinsild]

You're doubling up bonus actions there.

How so? I know Dreadful Strikes is a bonus action, and I would assume that Hunter's Mark would have been applied already during the first turn as it were. Once it's applied it merely is, correct? I read that when an attack hits you can just use a spell slot to get the +3d6 psychic damage so that's...not really an action per say.

[Daghoulish]

Not really. If you're using a longbow or crossbow with XBE you're getting two attacks, plus hunter's mark so like 1d8+X + 1d6 + 1d8+X + 1d6 already. That's fairly hefty on top of Dreadful Strikes for another +1d6 (per attack). So in total it's like 1d8+x(longbow+modifier) + 1d6(Hunter's mark) + 1d8+x(longbow+modifier) + 1d6 (hunter's mark) + 1d6 (Dreadful Strikes) + 1d6 (Dreadful Strikes) +3d6 (Blessings of the Courts).

I think it stacks up pretty good and can be consistent.

Your counting dreadful strikes twice, while it can only happen to a creature once per turn. You can't get hunters mark twice and dreadful strikes twice in the same turn, as both require a bonus action. Dreadful strikes to activate and Hunter's mark to move.

[Ravinsild]

Your counting dreadful strikes twice, while it can only happen to a creature once per turn. You can't get hunters mark twice and dreadful strikes twice in the same turn, as both require a bonus action. Dreadful strikes to activate and Hunter's mark to move.

Yeah I read that "It makes your attack magical for the rest of the turn" as basically you activate it as a bonus action, get magical attacks and it applies damage per attack. It says it can't happen more than once.

I also assumed it works how I play in the game, typically taking turn 1 to "set up" hunter's mark, etc and turn 2 to really lay into them. Which is my typical game play pattern (I play 3 rangers).

So turn one I would apply hunter's mark, attack twice with my bow. Turn 2 I would attack twice with my bow, probably using sharpshooter, and apply dreadful strikes (if I were playing this) and the smite.

[Grey Watcher]

So, that armorer subclass for the artificer...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y63i2NR9-LE

And here I was thinking of this: https://youtu.be/I9tcvSeemVo

[Millstone85]

And here I was thinking of this: https://youtu.be/I9tcvSeemVoWell now I definitely want this subclass to be in a Spelljammer book.

[Evaar]

Yeah I read that "It makes your attack magical for the rest of the turn" as basically you activate it as a bonus action, get magical attacks and it applies damage per attack. It says it can't happen more than once.

I also assumed it works how I play in the game, typically taking turn 1 to "set up" hunter's mark, etc and turn 2 to really lay into them. Which is my typical game play pattern (I play 3 rangers).

So turn one I would apply hunter's mark, attack twice with my bow. Turn 2 I would attack twice with my bow, probably using sharpshooter, and apply dreadful strikes (if I were playing this) and the smite.

And that all works so long as you attack two different targets, because of the weird clause "A creature can take this extra damage only once per turn" under Dreadful Strikes. So while it applies to all your attacks, you can't focus fire with it.

So my feedback would be for them to do away with that bit. It doesn't need that limitation.

[suplee215]

The problem I have with that is the repeatable temporary hit point trick is already covered by the artillerist. It's also party-wide +.
Maybe if there was some way for them to share it? if anything the armorsmith makes more sense with the battle Smith spell less than the battle Smith itself. This screams warding bond to me. all the smite spells are still crap but they're less crappy on the armorsmith than the battle Smith.

Yea but the artillerist is doing in a support way and not in a tank way. especially as The armorer needs it with how much aggro he is drawing as he makes enemies unable to attack others. Even with those thp, I don't see the artillerist taking on the tank role.

[Dork_Forge]

For context, I wasn't thrilled about it there either:

https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=23910129&postcount=38



I think the armor attacks that basically work like cantrips is good, a far sight better than previous implementations of casting-stat to attack & damage. To me the difference between level 1 and level 3 is marginal unless we're talking multiclassing, and if we are then the Int classes of Wiz/Art/Blood (+AT and EK) are getting close to the Cha combos Bard/Sorc/Lock/Pally and the gap will likely continue to close in future.
Maybe just color me cautious and a bit wary since the last time it happened.

You say damage, so would you prefer they get to use Int as the attack stat but not add int to damage? I agree in a campaign there's little actual time spent between 1 and 3, but in terms of multiclassing it makes a big difference and is the reason I don't see the multiclassing as close to Cha as you. There's no front loaded at 1st level Int class, where as there's two for Cha and the spell slot progression seems much less impacted on the Cha side. You go Bard or Sorcerer and progress normally, Warlock will give you a completely different pool but adds short rest recharge to the mix, Paladin is a half caster so that doesn't really slow things down much. Compared with Int: Wizard full caster, Artificer somewhere between half and full, Blood Hunter just not a caster and the other two third casters. You're spending more levels on the Int side for arguably less synergy and a delayed pay off, with no big ability like Divine Smite to help offset your troubles.

[stoutstien]

Yea but the artillerist is doing in a support way and not in a tank way. especially as The armorer needs it with how much aggro he is drawing as he makes enemies unable to attack others. Even with those thp, I don't see the artillerist taking on the tank role.

The artillerist is actually a solid Frontline caster. Between the THP, good AC/saves, CC spells, and blasting they act a lot like a cleric in terms of how they can play.

Later on when they provide half cover with their turrets and SSI they can be literal tanks.

[sambojin]

I quite like the Stars Druid. More magic is good magic, and I haven't seen it mentioned yet, but it does also give you a boost to your wildshapes. Like, *actual* beast wildshapes.

There's plenty of times where blowing both wildshape charges for an encounter is fine (moons do it all the time with elemental forms, though they last a lot longer). Especially if it's a mostly talky, explorey or investigatey section of a campaign. There's also some pretty good CR1/4-CR1/2 shapes up until level 5, in comparison to what any other melee class could do at those levels. So, imagine how much *better* any of those forms are with a bonus action 60' ranged attack doing 1d8+Wis using the Archer constellation.

It's an early game thing, but when you're already in a wildshape form, you've actually got a bit of low-level punch in a Stars Druid if you need it. Be it as a kitty-cat/tiny spider infiltrator, or just going into mega-archer-mode as a Frilled Deathspitter from Ixalan at lvl4 (better than eldritch blast, so OK for a short rest thingy). And after that, you're actually a good caster anyway, so this just helped you to get to that point.

It's not like you can't always be doing something as a Druid anyway, this just gives you an option for a little combat boost for lvls2-4 with little wildshape. Not Moon or Wildfire big, but still not bad. The Archer Constellation is pretty good for some stuff (well, for wildshape or for dexxy archer druids). It looks pretty weak, but it's got its plus points.


I mean, I'm not saying you *would* use it at level 8 as a Giant Eagle, but you *could*, just so you could be a Flying Carrier Battleship for funsies. At level 10, you get damage resistances too. At lvl14, a proper friend-teleporting, enemy-killing Yamato Battle Cannon. Like, it's there. It's a possible outcome. You're definitely going to be a Giant Eagle at some point as a Druid. Superior (battle)Tech!

Until then, you're just a mech with an extra ranged weapon slot when you need to be. That can coincidentally turn into any other sort of low-level mech you've ever seen. Superior Tech!

(pop it onto a Firbolg (shift-invis and sensors and any-mech-type-cloaking) or Protector Aasimar (jumpjets and reactor-overclocking) and you're set)

(it's not like you don't have the Polymorph spell by level 7, to go into assault mech or super summons-carrier battleship mode either :). Ramming speed! But keep firing, everyone!)

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I don't like the Armorer. IMO power armor is removed from the fantasy genre to the point it would break my immersion.
The Mind Sharpener infusion is too strong (should have limited uses) and is flavored oddly. When you're in shock from pain and stop concentrating for a moment, it shocks your mind more to clear it? Huh?
Cosmic Omen is pretty good stuff: Woe lets you reduce a creature's saving throw roll!

Now we can make a Paladin/Blade Pact Warlock/Fey Wanderer and smite when we smite while we smite.

Good thing what someone else does with their character is none of your business.

Y'all gatekeeping fantasy like you own it.

[Grey Watcher]

I don't like the Armorer. IMO power armor is removed from the fantasy genre to the point it would break my immersion.

As has been observed before, it does fit in OK with Eberron's steampunky, magic-as-technology... thing. I'm a huge fan of reflavoring things, so I can see taking the mechanics and finding some other rationale for a more traditional fantasy setting. Like, instead of calling it "power armor" maybe it's "alchemically treated armor."


The Mind Sharpener infusion is too strong (should have limited uses) and is flavored oddly. When you're in shock from pain and stop concentrating for a moment, it shocks your mind more to clear it? Huh?

Maybe the jolt clears your head before you've lost concentration for too long? Kinda like smelling salts, but with a shock?


Now we can make a Paladin/Blade Pact Warlock/Fey Wanderer and smite when we smite while we smite.

But is that Smite x3 or Smite cubed?

[jaappleton]

Eloquence Bards can impose Disadvantage on an enemy saving throw as a Bonus Action, if the enemy fails an Intelligence save, at 3rd level

Star Druids can perform a Reaction where they minus 1d6 from an enemy save at 6th level

The Mind Sliver cantrip, available to Bards, can minus 1d4 from a saving throw, this is an Action

The Bane spell, available to Bards, is an Action to cast, but lasts a minute and is Concentration, which subtracts 1d4 from an enemy saving throw

So, if you cast Bane the previous turn and use Mind Sliver the next, and are a 9th level PC with Star Druid 6 / Eloquence 3, then....

-1d4 (Bane)
-1d4 (Mind Sliver)
-1d6 (Star)
Plus Disadvantage

Using average rolls, that makes this -8.5 on a saving throw, with Disadvantage.

Not saying its an amazing build. But this MC could give your DM absolute fits! :smalltongue:

[Dienekes]

Huh, the most impressive thing about this I see is that it took what 6 years to find a way to make bonus actions work with two-weapon fighting. Also quite like how the ranger's abilities naturally work together to improve over time. Makes a nice boost in power without just adding bigger numbers.

[sambojin]

I'm just happy they gave us 60' ranged-Shillelagh on a Druid subclass, that can work in wildshape (for an action to prepare and a wildshape charge), and it does it for 10 minutes after that. It then works on every bonus action. I'm not sure why people think that's a weak thing. Bonus action options are amazing for any druid. Archer ain't bad!

And, as mentioned, tech flavoured funny-as Druid stuff after the iron-man stitch-up on Artificer. Lol.



"I, am, Iron Man!"
Bleh, you'd be considered a quaint little speck in the Star League before these times.... I am a Star Druid!


Aquatic campaign? Yes, shark it up with a fricken "lazer"! Be the thing you wanted to thing. This is fine! Happy Days!


("casting" Guiding Bolt without a "spell slot" can mean many things. I'm just going to duck-and-cover on this strangeness)

[Sception]

The Armorer Artificer would be alright if it weren't for the unpardonable sin of making them a SAD gish like the Hexblade.

Do you make wizards, sorcerers, warlocks, and druids use separate stats for spell attack and save DCs? Do you ban shillelagh? Do you require rogues, fighters, barbarians, and monks to alternate between dexterity based and strength based attacks?

SAD classes aren't an abberation in 5e, they're the default, and features that allow a gish character to rely on a single offensive stat aren't a problem, they're a solution to a problem. An awkward patch of a solution, but even so.

And the SADness of a weapon using hexblade is significantly overstated, as they still need dex 14 for medium armor if they don't want to get torn to pieces. Hexadins, the target for a lot of complaints need str 15 for heavy armor, or str 13 for multiclassing plus 14 for medium, and none of that counts the con they need like everyone else. That isn't appreciably more SAD than most other normal 5e class. In fact it's still on the harsher end of stat burdens, certainly nothing like as SAD as a rogue or fighter, and the fighter even gets bonus ASIs.

I don't disagree that there are problems with hex warrior, but the problem isn't that the feature exists, it's that it should have been tacked onto blade pact, not onto the 1st level features of the hexblade patron, making an already front loaded class even more so while failing to fix the MADness problem for bladelocks of any other patron AND giving medium armor proviciency to blasty book and chainlocks who didn't need the extra AC.


As for armorer, I love the concept, but some of the features and especially some of the invocations do seem a bit overtuned.

And I also don't like the term 'power armor'. The concept I'm fine with, fancy bespoke enchanted armor fits well enough in fantasy, but the term 'power armor' feels way too sci fi. Just like I prefer the terms 'outsiders' and 'aberrations' to 'aliens', or the term 'spelljammer' to 'space ship'.

Maybe 'arcane shell' or 'artificer's plate' or something like that.

[Personification]

I know I've been spending too much time with WoTC's other IP when my first thought on seeing druid was "it's an enchantment creature!"

Also, for the more fantasy-minded adventurer, for a cool take on the power armor build I'd suggest looking to the trope of the Black Knight type who never takes off their all-encompassing armor and is spoooky and mysterious about it.

[jaappleton]

Aquatic campaign? Yes, shark it up with a fricken "lazer"! Be the thing you wanted to thing. This is fine! Happy Days!
[/QUOTE]

Finally, Doctor Evil can have his sharks with freakin' laser beams attached to their heads!

[Grey Watcher]

Eloquence Bards can impose Disadvantage on an enemy saving throw as a Bonus Action, if the enemy fails an Intelligence save, at 3rd level

Star Druids can perform a Reaction where they minus 1d6 from an enemy save at 6th level

The Mind Sliver cantrip, available to Bards, can minus 1d4 from a saving throw, this is an Action

The Bane spell, available to Bards, is an Action to cast, but lasts a minute and is Concentration, which subtracts 1d4 from an enemy saving throw

So, if you cast Bane the previous turn and use Mind Sliver the next, and are a 9th level PC with Star Druid 6 / Eloquence 3, then....

-1d4 (Bane)
-1d4 (Mind Sliver)
-1d6 (Star)
Plus Disadvantage

Using average rolls, that makes this -8.5 on a saving throw, with Disadvantage.

Not saying its an amazing build. But this MC could give your DM absolute fits! :smalltongue:

Sounds good for burning through Legendary Resistance.

[Evaar]

And I also don't like the term 'power armor'. The concept I'm fine with, fancy bespoke enchanted armor fits well enough in fantasy, but the term 'power armor' feels way too sci fi. Just like I prefer the terms 'outsiders' and 'aberrations' to 'aliens', or the term 'spelljammer' to 'space ship'.

Maybe 'arcane shell' or 'artificer's plate' or something like that.

I actually agree wholeheartedly with this. "Power Armor" is very sci-fi coded, even though "Power" and "Armor" are both words that make sense in a fantasy setting. Artificer's Plate would work. Maybe we can brainstorm some more options that don't sound so sci-fi.

Personal Construct or Hollow Golem or something. Someone help me out, I'm drawing a blank.

[Sigreid]

I actually agree wholeheartedly with this. "Power Armor" is very sci-fi coded, even though "Power" and "Armor" are both words that make sense in a fantasy setting. Artificer's Plate would work. Maybe we can brainstorm some more options that don't sound so sci-fi.

Personal Construct or Hollow Golem or something. Someone help me out, I'm drawing a blank.

Golem armor

[Damon_Tor]

Golem armor

I called it "Mage Plate" when I made my armorer Artificer subclass.

[Personification]

Aquatic campaign? Yes, shark it up with a fricken "lazer"! Be the thing you wanted to thing. This is fine! Happy Days!
QUOTE]

Finally, Doctor Evil can have his sharks with freakin' laser beams attached to their heads!

Is this to something in this thread?

[jaappleton]

Is this to something in this thread?

A poorly formatted quote in response to Sambojin's post.

[Damon_Tor]

My full thoughts on the armorer:

The lack of Warding Bond on his spell list means he's going to fall behind the Battlesmith when it comes to tanking, so that's disappointing. The regenerating THP based on artificer level is the standout feature, and the the Heavy Armor proficiency (with strength requirement elimination) is welcome. A melee attack that "marks" is a great feature for a tank and something the Battlesmith is missing. The magnetic pulling effect is also nice, though the IntMod/Day restriction tempers my enthusiasm. I could see a really solid hybrid between an Armorer artificer and an Abjuration Wizard, two separate stackable pools of regenerating pseudo-hitpoints.

But still, due to the Warding Bond/SSI/Tiny Servant combo, I'll stick with the Battlesmith for my artificer-based tanking.

The ranged damage version of the build is more interesting: you can use a shield while being a competent ranged attacker without using an infusion to make it a reloading weapon, so you're free to use that infusion as the more powerful +1/+2 weapon enchantment instead. The damage is real nice: 2d6+int at level 3, 3d6+2int at level 5. That beats out the cantrips tossed out by the Artillarist or Alchemist at both levels, and those two don't really catch up until the cantrips grow to 4x dice at level 17, but by then the artificer is giving a party member (or a Tiny Servant/Homunculus throwing a Magic Stone) 1d6 extra damage plus advantage. The infiltrator also has no bonus actions he needs to be using or powers limited on a per-day basis, so there's no reason he can't be using his bonus actions every round to use the 3xTiny Servant/Magic Stone combo.

The bonus infusions are a fine, if somewhat boring, feature.

It's weird to me the armor doesn't come with a helm "slot". Oversight? The armor explicitly covers your entire body, which would include your head and face. Though come to think of it, this rather interferes with the implied subtlety of the infiltrator armor's ability to be worn under clothes.

The spell list, lack of Warding Bond aside, is tight. Magic Missile in a SSI? Ahaha, yes please, thank you. Shield is great, but at this point more artificer subclasses have it than don't so I won't gush too hard, but remember this is on top of heavy armor and a shield. And Mirror Image. and Greater Invisibility or (from the standard artificer list) Haste.

I have some issues with how the armor is only made into your power armor while you're wearing it, and stops being power armor when you take it off. That means in order to put more than one infusion on your armor, you have to be wearing it, it has to be on your body. And what happens to those infusions when you take it off, and it stops counting as power armor, and is thus ineligible for the extra infusions? What if you've got to (or want to) take your armor off halfway through your adventuring day? IMO, making a suit of armor into power armor (Again, I agree the name should change, and I like "Mage Plate") should occur at the end of a long rest, and not require you to be wearing it. It remains power armor when you take it off. If they are worried the artificer could pass off the armor to someone else to use (Why worry about this? Let it happen IMO) then add a clause that only you can wear the power armor.

[Damon_Tor]

On the Fey Wanderer:

I'm annoyed by the conceptual and mechanical conflation between Hunter's Mark and Dreadful Strikes. I suppose Hunter's Mark is better against a single more powerful opponent while Dreadful Strikes is better against several weaker opponents, so they aren't strictly equivalent, but it's still annoying that the two coexist in such a similar space. And I share the concerns others have with how the timing is supposed to work with two-weapon fighting. IMO: just give them 1d6 psychic damage on each attack, limit once per creature per turn, no bonus action required. This way it works fine with Hunter's Mark and Zephyr Strike and Two-Weapon Fighting and Swift Quiver and all the other things Rangers could be doing with their bonus action. Is it too similar to Colossus Slayer (and straight up better)? Maybe, but I think it's distinct enough, and let's be honest, they stopped caring about how well balanced the new ranger subclasses were against the PHB subclasses a long time ago.

Blessings of the Courts: the smite doesn't scale with slot size, but this is a fine use of your first level slots when they stop being good for anything else, and the fear is a nice touch. I like adding WisMod to Cha checks. It would be possible to make a Ranger-Face by going Wis/Cha and taking Shillelagh or Magic Stones to use Wis for your attack stat.

Beguiling Twist: Really nice compliment to Blessings of the Courts, it either lets your debuff live on by moving it to another creature. The debuff could actually bounce back and forth between two creatures again and again assuming you have a turn between each of their turns so your reaction refreshes. You could actually move the debuff to an ally (or even yourself) if the initiative order makes that the most beneficial option. It's entirely possible to use this in a social situation: unlike Charm Person, there's no awareness by the target that a charm has occurred when the effect ends.

Misty Presence: Really freaking strong against something with a weak wisdom save, and you can recharge it with a 4th level spell slot. Pretty slick, and a great feature.

[Amechra]

As an aside, a Warforged Armorer sounds like a really fun way to play a straight-up Golem. I'll have to fiddle with that.

[DarknessEternal]

I don't understand the hubbub about Armorer. Artificer is already an incredibly weak class, and this does nothing to change that.

[Dork_Forge]

I don't understand the hubbub about Armorer. Artificer is already an incredibly weak class, and this does nothing to change that.

Wait what, how is the Artificer a weak subclass?

[ProsecutorGodot]

Wait what, how is the Artificer a weak subclass?

I'd meant to ask "in what context" but you kind of beat me to the punch. Obviously it's not a damaging powerhouse, it's not meant to be, so I'm not sure exactly in which way they're gauging this "weakness".

[Mjolnirbear]

I'm playing an artillerist, lvl 3. I consistently outdamage every one. I do smite-level damage, to multiple people, multiple times in a row, for possibly more than one combat, at (at most) the cost of a single spell slot and my bonus action. I still have my actual action to do an aoe cantrip or shocking grasp.

It won't be for long. We're going into Hell soon, and paladins get certain perks against fiends. And 2d8 vs 2d10+6d8+4 means the pally will be far, far better at squashing her chosen bug while mine has become fart damage spread thickly about the room.

[Dork_Forge]

I'd meant to ask "in what context" but you kind of beat me to the punch. Obviously it's not a damaging powerhouse, it's not meant to be, so I'm not sure exactly in which way they're gauging this "weakness".

Even in the damage aspect (as MjolnirBear supports) the Artillerist is a pretty good blasting option (especially since it offers force damage for turrets and a blanket d8 spell damage boost), but I can't see a Battle Smith or even an Alchemist doing sub par damage, they'd certainly stay relevant.


I'm playing an artillerist, lvl 3. I consistently outdamage every one. I do smite-level damage, to multiple people, multiple times in a row, for possibly more than one combat, at (at most) the cost of a single spell slot and my bonus action. I still have my actual action to do an aoe cantrip or shocking grasp.

It won't be for long. We're going into Hell soon, and paladins get certain perks against fiends. And 2d8 vs 2d10+6d8+4 means the pally will be far, far better at squashing her chosen bug while mine has become fart damage spread thickly about the room.

Even when you go to Hell you have the option of the Force Ballista and supporting with temp hp. I also really hope you flavour SHocking Grasp as your Arcane Firearm being a taser.

[Damon_Tor]

I don't understand the hubbub about Armorer. Artificer is already an incredibly weak class, and this does nothing to change that.

They aren't the best at anything.

They are, however, the second best at everything.

[bendking]

I'm playing an artillerist, lvl 3. I consistently outdamage every one. I do smite-level damage, to multiple people, multiple times in a row, for possibly more than one combat, at (at most) the cost of a single spell slot and my bonus action. I still have my actual action to do an aoe cantrip or shocking grasp.

It won't be for long. We're going into Hell soon, and paladins get certain perks against fiends. And 2d8 vs 2d10+6d8+4 means the pally will be far, far better at squashing her chosen bug while mine has become fart damage spread thickly about the room.

Could you explain how you do this damage, and write some numbers? It was my impression Artillerist isn't bad but also isn't amazing. I'd like to hear what you came up with.

[Dork_Forge]

Could you explain how you do this damage, and write some numbers? It was my impression Artillerist isn't bad but also isn't amazing. I'd like to hear what you came up with.

It sounds like they're just referring to the flame thrower and smite level refers to it being 2d8.

[stoutstien]

I don't understand the hubbub about Armorer. Artificer is already an incredibly weak class, and this does nothing to change that.

In what regard? They are the mitigation king atm and deal decent damage on top of a very flexible chassis. They don't replace anyone but can enhance everyone. Unlike other classes like paladin there isn't any diminishing returns from having more than one in a party.

it's not the class I was hoping for but they did pull off introducing a new support class that isn't boring and rewards clever problem solving.

Actually think the armor smith is a weak option and still it would be perform adequately.

[Grey Watcher]

... Hollow Golem ...


Golem armor

I vote for Snuggie Golem. :smalltongue:

[Personification]

I vote for Snuggie Golem. :smalltongue:

Seconded.:smallbiggrin:
Now I want an OotS style TShirt of this in the mode of the cuddle elementals.

[DarknessEternal]

Artificers do not do decent damage. They do not have any mechanics to do so. The fact that so many of you think this means we're simply not playing D&D fundamentally in the same capacity.

Please explain the details of this decent damage. Let's start with a target of 50 damage sustained per round at level 12, adjusted for accuracy. That is decent damage in the D&D I play.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Artificers do not do decent damage. They do not have any mechanics to do so. The fact that so many of you think this means we're simply not playing D&D fundamentally in the same capacity.

Please explain the details of this decent damage. Let's start with a target of 50 damage sustained per round at level 12, adjusted for accuracy. That is decent damage in the D&D I play.

A TWF Fighter with max Dex and dual wielder is only getting 4d8(21) + 20 = 41 almost reaching that mark.

But TWF is generally considered sub par, let's go to the opposite end of the spectrum and be ridiculously out of line with a 20 str paladin Pam/gwm. 2d10(13)+1d4(~2)+12d8(66)+45 = 126.

That's not sustained though, that spent all of their 3rd level slots, so let's just take the 12d8 out for 66.

Decent damage is relative to the composition of your party and the challenges you're facing, nobody faults Bard's as being a bad class because of their own damage output, and artificers have a lot more tools than a bard does for damage, artillerist having several decent options. They're certainly not mediocre but nobody is claiming that they will be there best at all levels.

[Magicspook]

I vote for Snuggie Golem. :smalltongue:

Golem onesie

[stoutstien]

Artificers do not do decent damage. They do not have any mechanics to do so. The fact that so many of you think this means we're simply not playing D&D fundamentally in the same capacity.

Please explain the details of this decent damage. Let's start with a target of 50 damage sustained per round at level 12, adjusted for accuracy. That is decent damage in the D&D I play.

i don't know of any build that can maintain 50 sustained DPR at those levels. maybe for 3-4 encounters but not truly sustained. id like to see a single build that can that doesn't require narrow factors.
but for giggles i compared the battle smith vs the standard PaM pally. https://anydice.com/program/19c4c. the BS isnt even using it SSI and the artillerist can double this output with a little clever planning.
not the mention the artificer can fly, deal this damage at range, has higher mitigation, and still has spell slots open for whatever challenges arise.

[TIPOT]

Artificers do not do decent damage. They do not have any mechanics to do so. The fact that so many of you think this means we're simply not playing D&D fundamentally in the same capacity.

Please explain the details of this decent damage. Let's start with a target of 50 damage sustained per round at level 12, adjusted for accuracy. That is decent damage in the D&D I play.

I'm incredibly curious how that's a reasonable target and why you chose level 12 of all things but sure I guess.

Battle smith 12 gwm pole arm master. Has a +2 glaive,
Either haste for , 3d10+51+1d4+17 average 87 damage.
Or enlarge for 2d10+34+4d4+17 average 72 damage.
no buffs 2d10+34+d4+17 average 64

Or Battlesmith 12 sharpshooter + crossbow expert
Has a +2 handcrossbow.
Either haste, 4d6+68 average 82 damage
Flame arrows, 6d6+51 average 72
Enlarge 3d6+3d4+51 average 69
No buffs 3d6+51 average 62

Or Battlesmith 12 sharpshooter, has a +2 longbow bracers of archery
Either haste, 3d8+57 and steel defender d8+4 average 77 damage
Flame arrows, 2d8+2d6+38 and steel defender d8+4 average 62
No buffs, 2d8+38 and steel defender d8+4 average 55

[Dork_Forge]

Artificers do not do decent damage. They do not have any mechanics to do so. The fact that so many of you think this means we're simply not playing D&D fundamentally in the same capacity.

Please explain the details of this decent damage. Let's start with a target of 50 damage sustained per round at level 12, adjusted for accuracy. That is decent damage in the D&D I play.

What an arbitrary target, so you mostly play tier 3 and up D&D with damage orientated characters. How are you achieving this 50 sustained per round damage? A sword and board Paladin is only doing 4d8(18)+14=32, well below your target even with Dueling mixed in. I'm not seeing anyway you're hitting that target without using some kind of resources, you could probably do it with a +5-10 builds but that is dependent on the AC of the enemy. An Artillerist using Fire Bolt and Force Ballista at 12th level looks something like 3d10(16.5)+4d8(18)=34.5 with a push effect mixed in. That's nothing but straight Artillerist without any racial benefits or feats.

You should really present a couple examples if you're going to make a sweeping claim like that.

[bendking]

i don't know of any build that can maintain 50 sustained DPR at those levels. maybe for 3-4 encounters but not truly sustained. id like to see a single build that can that

That isn't really a hard mark to hit. Let's look at Warlock, using the most basic of strategies right out of the PHB, this should give us an indication of the expected DPR of a character at that level.
Standard Warlock 12 with EB, Agonizing Blast, and Hex does: (1d10 + 1d6 + 5)x3 at a +9 to hit, that's 32 DPR adjusted for accuracy against 15 AC which I would consider sustained, and that's without using any of your big spells. Add Hexblade's Curse and you get to 41 DPR from your second turn onward (though not sustained). Already pretty close to that 50 mark with almost no optimization.

Let's look at another basic example, Zealot Barbarian at level 12, with PAM and GWM: using Reckless Attack (which you always should) and with Rage, you would be doing 52 DPR starting from your second turn. This isn't truly sustained since your Rages are limited, so for sake of being thorough, it'd be 49 DPR without Rage. Mind you, this is pretty much the most basic optimized build you can do. You can go definitely beyond this at level 12.

If your build can only hit the most basic of damage of a Warlock without any optimization, I would consider it to be doing OK damage, but nothing special, since truly optimized builds can go way above what the Warlock can do, and the Barbarian is only the simplest example of this.
I will say that perhaps the 50 damage mark is a bit much. Perhaps I would measure a build doing good damage from the 40 or 45 damage mark at level 12, but I could see high-optimization tables using that mark.


I'm incredibly curious how that's a reasonable target and why you chose level 12 of all things but sure I guess.

Battle smith 12 gwm pole arm master. Has a +2 glaive,
Either haste for , 3d10+51+1d4+17 average 87 damage.
Or enlarge for 2d10+34+4d4+17 average 72 damage.
no buffs 2d10+34+d4+17 average 64

Or Battlesmith 12 sharpshooter + crossbow expert
Has a +2 handcrossbow.
Either haste, 4d6+68 average 82 damage
Flame arrows, 6d6+51 average 72
Enlarge 3d6+3d4+51 average 69
No buffs 3d6+51 average 62

Or Battlesmith 12 sharpshooter, has a +2 longbow bracers of archery
Either haste, 3d8+57 and steel defender d8+4 average 77 damage
Flame arrows, 2d8+2d6+38 and steel defender d8+4 average 62
No buffs, 2d8+38 and steel defender d8+4 average 55

I don't think you're accounting for accuracy here. It would probably be whatever numbers you're writing only multiplied by 0.65, or even 0.50 using Sharpshooter.

[stoutstien]

That isn't really a hard mark to hit. Let's look at Warlock, using the most basic of strategies right out of the PHB, this should give us an indication of the expected DPR of a character at that level.
Standard Warlock 12 with EB, Agonizing Blast, and Hex does: (1d10 + 1d6 + 5)x3 at a +9 to hit, that's 32 DPR adjusted for accuracy against 15 AC which I would consider sustained, and that's without using any of your big spells. Add Hexblade's Curse and you get to 41 DPR from your second turn onward (though not sustained). Already pretty close to that 50 mark with almost no optimization.

Let's look at another basic example, Zealot Barbarian at level 12, with PAM and GWM: using Reckless Attack (which you always should) and with Rage, you would be doing 52 DPR starting from your second turn. This isn't truly sustained since your Rages are limited, so for sake of being thorough, it'd be 49 DPR without Rage. Mind you, this is pretty much the most basic optimized build you can do. You can go definitely beyond this at level 12.

If your build can only hit the most basic of damage of a Warlock without any optimization, I would consider it to be doing OK damage, but nothing special, since truly optimized builds can go way above what the Warlock can do, and the Barbarian is only the simplest example of this.
I will say that perhaps the 50 damage mark is a bit much. Perhaps I would measure a build doing good damage from the 40 or 45 damage mark at level 12, but I could see high-optimization tables using that mark.



I don't think you're accounting for accuracy here. It would probably be whatever numbers you're writing only multiplied by 0.65, or even 0.50 using Sharpshooter.

Spells,rage, or any limited resources are not "sustainable" which was why I was curious on what they considered constant DPR.

[Dork_Forge]

That isn't really a hard mark to hit. Let's look at Warlock, using the most basic of strategies right out of the PHB, this should give us an indication of the expected DPR of a character at that level.
Standard Warlock 12 with EB, Agonizing Blast, and Hex does: (1d10 + 1d6 + 5)x3 at a +9 to hit, that's 32 DPR adjusted for accuracy against 15 AC which I would consider sustained, and that's without using any of your big spells. Add Hexblade's Curse and you get to 41 DPR from your second turn onward (though not sustained). Already pretty close to that 50 mark with almost no optimization.

Let's look at another basic example, Zealot Barbarian at level 12, with PAM and GWM: using Reckless Attack (which you always should) and with Rage, you would be doing 52 DPR starting from your second turn. This isn't truly sustained since your Rages are limited, so for sake of being thorough, it'd be 49 DPR without Rage. Mind you, this is pretty much the most basic optimized build you can do. You can go definitely beyond this at level 12.

If your build can only hit the most basic of damage of a Warlock without any optimization, I would consider it to be doing OK damage, but nothing special, since truly optimized builds can go way above what the Warlock can do, and the Barbarian is only the simplest example of this.
I will say that perhaps the 50 damage mark is a bit much. Perhaps I would measure a build doing good damage from the 40 or 45 damage mark at level 12, but I could see high-optimization tables using that mark.



I don't think you're accounting for accuracy here. It would probably be whatever numbers you're writing only multiplied by 0.65, or even 0.50 using Sharpshooter.

The Warlock is a terrible benchmark for sustainable damage imo because it's the outlier not the norm. It's weird that Agonizing blast applies to all rays, though even with that you fall short using two different limited resources, sustained damage at 12 would probably be in the decent category at around 30 with pushing 40+ moving into good. If you use a normal caster using cantrips then the damage threshold falls signifcantly, resourcefree (and thus truly sustainable damage) isn't hitting around the 50 mark reliably in tier 3 and would probably struggle to do so in tier 4, just consider the implications of a party of 5 doing that kind of damage. You'd wipe out anything with less than 250hp in one turn without trying, that would make actually challenging monsters comical in their stats.

[ZorroGames]

I don't like the Armorer. IMO power armor is removed from the fantasy genre to the point it would break my immersion.
The Mind Sharpener infusion is too strong (should have limited uses) and is flavored oddly. When you're in shock from pain and stop concentrating for a moment, it shocks your mind more to clear it? Huh?
Cosmic Omen is pretty good stuff: Woe lets you reduce a creature's saving throw roll!

Now we can make a Paladin/Blade Pact Warlock/Fey Wanderer and smite when we smite while we smite.

Ranger was as always a WOTC over correct but if it improves Ranger in final form, yes.

Fantasy Power Armor? “Animated armor you can drive”? Not for me

[stoutstien]

Ranger was as always a WOTC over correct but if it improves Ranger in final form, yes.

Fantasy Power Armor? “Animated armor you can drive”? Not for me

I'm going to take this subclass for a test drive. I'm refluffing the armor as a metal base symbiont being.

[DarknessEternal]

That isn't really a hard mark to hit. Let's look at Warlock, using the most basic of strategies right out of the PHB, this should give us an indication of the expected DPR of a character at that level.
Standard Warlock 12 with EB, Agonizing Blast, and Hex does: (1d10 + 1d6 + 5)x3 at a +9 to hit, that's 32 DPR adjusted for accuracy against 15 AC which I would consider sustained, and that's without using any of your big spells. Add Hexblade's Curse and you get to 41 DPR from your second turn onward (though not sustained). Already pretty close to that 50 mark with almost no optimization.

Let's look at another basic example, Zealot Barbarian at level 12, with PAM and GWM: using Reckless Attack (which you always should) and with Rage, you would be doing 52 DPR starting from your second turn. This isn't truly sustained since your Rages are limited, so for sake of being thorough, it'd be 49 DPR without Rage. Mind you, this is pretty much the most basic optimized build you can do. You can go definitely beyond this at level 12.

If your build can only hit the most basic of damage of a Warlock without any optimization, I would consider it to be doing OK damage, but nothing special, since truly optimized builds can go way above what the Warlock can do, and the Barbarian is only the simplest example of this.
I will say that perhaps the 50 damage mark is a bit much. Perhaps I would measure a build doing good damage from the 40 or 45 damage mark at level 12, but I could see high-optimization tables using that.

Finally someone who gets it.

[stoutstien]

Finally someone who gets it.

So the fact that none of those examples actually reach the 50 DPR mark of substantial DPR isn't an issue? So in reality you meant 50 + of nova DPR potential which the artificer certainly can reach at lv 12 with select builds.

battle smith dropping 46.41 with haste up plus 14.21 with SD attack( gauntlets of ogre).

Toss on a familiar using SSI for web/FF for advantage and this could easily go up 20%.

[DarknessEternal]

So the fact that none of those examples actually reach the 50 DPR mark of substantial DPR isn't an issue? So in reality you meant 50 + of nova DPR potential which the artificer certainly can reach at lv 12 with select builds.

battle smith dropping 46.41 with haste up plus 14.21 with SD attack( gauntlets of ogre).

Toss on a familiar using SSI for web/FF for advantage and this could easily go up 20%.

How did you miss all this


Already pretty close to that 50 mark with almost no optimization.

Mind you, this is pretty much the most basic optimized build you can do. You can go definitely beyond this at level 12.

If your build can only hit the most basic of damage of a Warlock without any optimization, I would consider it to be doing OK damage, but nothing special, since truly optimized builds can go way above what

[Dork_Forge]

How did you miss all this

You're not directly answering anyone, if this is the D&D you play, give an example or two of your own that hits 50 sustainable DPR wihout any resources to spend, it should be as easy as just recalling you and your team mates.

[stoutstien]

How did you miss all this

I didn't miss anything. You made a statement that artificers cannot keep up in damage with a semi/fully optimized group which is false. The existence of other classes being able to do it as well is completely irrelevant.

If you want to use the warlock as a DPR measuring stick for some reason nothing is stopping you but artificer is doing just fine. more so if you start having multiple encounters between each short rest.

[Mjolnirbear]

Even in the damage aspect (as MjolnirBear supports) the Artillerist is a pretty good blasting option (especially since it offers force damage for turrets and a blanket d8 spell damage boost), but I can't see a Battle Smith or even an Alchemist doing sub par damage, they'd certainly stay relevant.

Even when you go to Hell you have the option of the Force Ballista and supporting with temp hp. I also really hope you flavour SHocking Grasp as your Arcane Firearm being a taser.

My kobold artificer uses runes carved/etched/written in Draconic on physical objects. As he doesn't have the Arcane Firearm yet, Shocking Grasp and Thunderclap are copper chains on a leather gauntlet, the chains fastening a blue gem etched with runes for 'Storm'. So it's kinda like a taser glove. I prefer that image to switching to a wand, so I'm not sure how I'll write up my arcane firearm when I get it.

My cannon is a clockwork/wood/leather dragon with legs and tail that fasten onto my forearm. The eyes go blue for the Force cannon, the mouth opens for the fire cone, and the whole thing sits back and 'sings' with waves of lines written in draconic for the THP.


Could you explain how you do this damage, and write some numbers? It was my impression Artillerist isn't bad but also isn't amazing. I'd like to hear what you came up with.

To be fair to the other players, many are new, and the ones who aren't aren't maximizing damage (the warlock has neither Agonizing Blast nor the pushback invocation, f.ex).

Here's how I'm playing: I summon my cannon, and if there are groups (which there are, it's a huge party and a single bad guy doesn't last a single round) and aim for at least two bad guys with the fire cone. 2d8 dmg each. Then I'll either Shocking Grasp or Thunderclap, depending on number of enemies, or important baddies wearing metal armor, or enemies with high CON saves. It's essentially 1d6+2d8 at-will to multiple enemies, and I'm actually tanking too, because I have a 19 AC and +2 CON bonus. At level 5 it will be 2d6+1d8+2d8 at-will to hopefully at least two enemies per turn, and if I go for a levelled spell for damage, it has essentially a free upcast due to Arcane Firearm.

It can be a lot of damage, but soon enough we'll be facing bad guys it's better to focus down, and my spell slots will be better spent on THP or buffs like Faerie Fire. At that point I'll switch out Thunderclap for a flavour cantrip.


Artificers do not do decent damage. They do not have any mechanics to do so. The fact that so many of you think this means we're simply not playing D&D fundamentally in the same capacity.

Please explain the details of this decent damage. Let's start with a target of 50 damage sustained per round at level 12, adjusted for accuracy. That is decent damage in the D&D I play.

I'm at level 3, not level 12. The fact that my expended slots do the same amount of damage as a single paladin strike but also lasts for an hour per slot is what is causing me to do amazing damage in comparison. Not a single one of us has feats.

At level 12, which is high-level play where I'm from, Tink will be doing 4d8 with Shocking Grasp, 3d6+1d8 for Thunderclap (assuming I keep that cantrip) and 3d8 from my cannon at-will. Assuming my AoE options, that's 28.5 average if I hit only one person, nearly 60 if I hit at least two which is pretty reasonable. It's sustainable, roughly comparable to an at-will mini-fireball. The catch is that both CON and DEX saves are pretty good at high-level play, so I don't actually expect to do that much; the potential is there in the right circumstances and especially with more targets, but in general I'd expect to do less damage.

That's ignoring infusions, spells, and even the spell-storing device, which could be adding 8-10 Thunderwaves, Shatters or Scorching Rays, which can be 'upcast' if I make my Arcane Firearm into the SSI.

[stoutstien]

None of this is even addressing the real power of the artificer in a group of players who like to optimize. They are hands-down the ultimate 5th party member. Hello mr. Warlock how would you like plus one to all your EB attacks that ignore half cover? Silly Barbarian, you should have took polearm Master first either way there's a magical plus one weapon for ya. How's it going mr. Corpse I mean rogue? Would you happen to like a cloak of elvenkind while you stay out ahead? It's so nice we have a paladin to actually put some charisma behind their Aura a of protection. Would be a shame if somebody still failed their saving throw. Nevermind here's a floating + 5. How's it going mr. Wizard dude? You mind if I strap a screwdriver to the back of your familiar so he casts shatter? No? Ok fine I'll load up invisibility for the rouge.

Oh yeah I have a subclass also.

[Mjolnirbear]

None of this is even addressing the real power of the artificer in a group of players who like to optimize. They are hands-down the ultimate 5th party member. Hello mr. Warlock how would you like plus one to all your EB attacks that ignore half cover? Silly Barbarian, you should have took polearm Master first either way there's a magical plus one weapon for ya. How's it going mr. Corpse I mean rogue? Would you happen to like a cloak of elvenkind while you stay out ahead? It's so nice we have a paladin to actually put some charisma behind their Aura a of protection. Would be a shame if somebody still failed their saving throw. Nevermind here's a floating + 5. How's it going mr. Wizard dude? You mind if I strap a screwdriver to the back of your familiar so he casts shatter? No? Ok fine I'll load up invisibility for the rouge.

Oh yeah I have a subclass also.

Eh.

The infusions are extremely limited. I don't have a problem healing, buffing, debuffing, or otherwise generally supporting my allies, but they can spend their own dang money on their own dang magic items, until I have infusions to spare--which isn't gonna happen anytime soon.

I *am* a good target for my own infusions--my defense infusion helps me be one of two tanks (party of 7) for instance, and the casters have better casting stats (they rolled, I used standard array) than I do. Going into Avernus, magic weapons will be important I'm certain, but by level 6 I'll be wanting the deflection shield *and* the defensive armor. I'm still really into the homunculous even though it competes with my bonus action. The monk's weapons will count as magical by then, the paladin will have smites, and among the 7 of us I'm sure the rogue will manage to find a magic weapon.

Boosting the paladin's aura will be awesome, I'll admit, unless she already has a good charisma by then... but you can't switch out infusions for immediate situations. It's only useful if you can plan ahead and judge that you need to change something in order to succeed. In those circumstances it's absolutely worth it to share; but for general situations, it's just easier to stay selfish.

Especially if I gave a magic sword to the rogue, then needed my infusion slot back a few weeks later; by then the rogue is attached, it's *his* magic sword, and he'd feel salty about losing it. It's not the best path to party harmony. I'd far rather save up my downtime and actually craft **** for people.

[stoutstien]

Eh.

The infusions are extremely limited. I don't have a problem healing, buffing, debuffing, or otherwise generally supporting my allies, but they can spend their own dang money on their own dang magic items, until I have infusions to spare--which isn't gonna happen anytime soon.

I *am* a good target for my own infusions--my defense infusion helps me be one of two tanks (party of 7) for instance, and the casters have better casting stats (they rolled, I used standard array) than I do. Going into Avernus, magic weapons will be important I'm certain, but by level 6 I'll be wanting the deflection shield *and* the defensive armor. I'm still really into the homunculous even though it competes with my bonus action. The monk's weapons will count as magical by then, the paladin will have smites, and among the 7 of us I'm sure the rogue will manage to find a magic weapon.

Boosting the paladin's aura will be awesome, I'll admit, unless she already has a good charisma by then... but you can't switch out infusions for immediate situations. It's only useful if you can plan ahead and judge that you need to change something in order to succeed. In those circumstances it's absolutely worth it to share; but for general situations, it's just easier to stay selfish.

Especially if I gave a magic sword to the rogue, then needed my infusion slot back a few weeks later; by then the rogue is attached, it's *his* magic sword, and he'd feel salty about losing it. It's not the best path to party harmony. I'd far rather save up my downtime and actually craft **** for people.

The fact that you can share the infusions isn't for everyone but the option exists. I personally more likely to share them than use them on myself.

[PrinceOfMadness]

I'm hoping to be able to take the Armorsmith out for a spin in a high-level one-shot soon so I can tinker around with it. It seems like it might make for a more resilient tank than an equivalently leveled paladin or fighter: d8 hit die is just okay, but at-will imposed disadvantage built into your attacks and 20 THP every round for your bonus action seems like a really good deal. Not to mention a +4 to AC (cloak of protection, ring of protection, +2 armor/shield) and +8 to all saves at level 20 just from magic-item-class-features is pretty incredible.

You've got proficiency in con saving throws built in, and the Mind-sharpener infusion helps guarantee you won't lose that vital concentration spell (hello Haste/Greater Invisibility/Animate Objects).

Tack it on a warforged for another +1 to AC and another +2 to all saves (two loaded wand sheathes) to make your DM cry. Be Iron-Iron Man.

Mind you, it's not nearly as good in terms of saving throws before level 20, and the damage potential is not going to be anything close to the aforementioned fighter/paladin. But it seems like a strong contender for a late-game tank PC, even disregarding the extra support utility every artificer brings to the table in terms of build-in Magic Mart.

[DarknessEternal]

Be Iron-Iron Man.


Iron Man obliterates things with massive weaponry. He doesn't just take a beating until the enemies tire themselves out.

[Dork_Forge]

Iron Man obliterates things with massive weaponry. He doesn't just take a beating until the enemies tire themselves out.

You keep ignoring everyone presenting you with proof that the Artificer does provide decent and above damage, you gave an unrealistically high target and failed to provide any supporting builds yet continue to bash on a class for being unable to do "decent" damage. A claim no one else seems to agree with you on so far really. The Armorer provides a decent ranged attack option that can be buffed with infusions and is compatible with Sharpshooter and Sneak Attack, how is that failing to meet your criteria of decent?

[Chaosmancer]

A few thoughts.

The Star Druid 15th level ability needs to buff. I do like the teleportation tricks, but it is essentially a daily ability at high tiers and does only 4d10 save for nothing. That sucks. I'm AFB at the moment, but I think that is less damage than a single use of Sunbeam, which is concentration and repeatable.


I've been worried about the Artificer temp hp. I am playing an artillerist and I've seen how good the temp hp turret is, but I'm wondering if that is why their offensive abilities are a bit less. I definitely think the Infiltrator needs a huge buff though, it is just no where near as good as the Guardian mode.

I think the Ranger smite should scale with spell levels. 3d6 is pretty nice for a first, acceptable for a second level (I'd never cast a second level for 3d6, but since it is extra on top of damage) but it just is not worth it for a 3rd level.

I'm really nervous about the Dragon form for the Druid. That is essentially guaranteeing that they won't drop concetration, and they are a concentration heavy class. Very very nice, the chalice is actually the one I see as the weakest. It seems like a very minimal benefit to healing, but maybe it would just be a table difference. The archer is fun though. Gives some solid damage for a bonus action on top of your spells for the turn.

[Kane0]

Agreed on starburst and ranger smite.
Having three useful forms to choose from is pretty good, i wouldnt want any of them to be too powerful (we have a healing druid and the moon/wildfire druids for damage using your wildshape). That said if the concentration boost is too good compared to the other two by all means cut it back a bit. Maybe tie it to druid level so its still good for them (druids rely heavily on conc) but prevents MC shenanigans

[Damon_Tor]

Come to think of it, it's very interesting that the Lightning Launcher is a ranged weapon and does lightning damage: that means if you put that on a rogue, the rogue is now doing all of his sneak attack damage as lightning damage. Add a level of tempest cleric for the channel divinity.

[Arkhios]

Come to think of it, it's very interesting that the Lightning Launcher is a ranged weapon and does lightning damage: that means if you put that on a rogue, the rogue is now doing all of his sneak attack damage as lightning damage. Add a level of tempest cleric for the channel divinity.

Oof, that's got a hefty blast potential indeed.

Then again, rogues are able to use Sun Blade (or whatever it was called) to deliver radiant sneak attack damage (because the weapon qualifies as a shortsword, which is a finesse melee weapon), so it's not completely unprecedented.

All things considered, to do as you suggested, it requires a multiclass between not only two but three classes to pull this off, and meeting prerequisites for three different ability scores (dex 13 for rogue, int 13 for artificer and wis 13 for cleric). I'd say it's still fine.

[TIPOT]

A few thoughts.

The Star Druid 15th level ability needs to buff. I do like the teleportation tricks, but it is essentially a daily ability at high tiers and does only 4d10 save for nothing. That sucks. I'm AFB at the moment, but I think that is less damage than a single use of Sunbeam, which is concentration and repeatable.


I've been worried about the Artificer temp hp. I am playing an artillerist and I've seen how good the temp hp turret is, but I'm wondering if that is why their offensive abilities are a bit less. I definitely think the Infiltrator needs a huge buff though, it is just no where near as good as the Guardian mode.

I think the Ranger smite should scale with spell levels. 3d6 is pretty nice for a first, acceptable for a second level (I'd never cast a second level for 3d6, but since it is extra on top of damage) but it just is not worth it for a 3rd level.

I'm really nervous about the Dragon form for the Druid. That is essentially guaranteeing that they won't drop concetration, and they are a concentration heavy class. Very very nice, the chalice is actually the one I see as the weakest. It seems like a very minimal benefit to healing, but maybe it would just be a table difference. The archer is fun though. Gives some solid damage for a bonus action on top of your spells for the turn.

On the 14th level druid ability - I think the real power in it is in the teleportation ability of it. It's a weakened version of scatter (a 6th level spell) except with damage and status effects on it too. I think it's better than you're giving credit for. Compared to other druid 14 abilities as well it's actually pretty strong.

[Chaosmancer]

On the 14th level druid ability - I think the real power in it is in the teleportation ability of it. It's a weakened version of scatter (a 6th level spell) except with damage and status effects on it too. I think it's better than you're giving credit for. Compared to other druid 14 abilities as well it's actually pretty strong.

You have a point that most 14th level abilities for the Druid are weak. I don't think that is a good excuse for making this one weak too.

The teleportation ability is nice, I just don't know if it is good enough.

Firstly, it can only teleport allies who are in the radius. This means the teleportation is at it's best when the entire party is within 30ft of each other, and has a large number of enemies around them. This in turn tells me that we are already engaged in melee and that the frontliners are likely in good position already. So, it is already most likely taking the party out of position, which might lead to them being in a better position, but that is a highly depended situation.

Secondly, if you do not teleport your allies out, they get hit. So, you really must teleport them out or risk them being the only combatant to fail the save and be surrounded while blind.

Third, being daily is not good. This means the Druid is going to look for this ability to be impactful. They need a situation where they can hit a good number of enemies, where the teleport grants them good positioning, where the blindness might be clutch and their other abilities to cause blindness or similiar (because druids actually have a lot of those) for a longer period of time aren't as good. And then the enemy saves and nothing happens except the teleport.

I won't say it is worthless, but it could be better and more attractive to use, but Sunbeam, a spell they will have access to, gives better damage and blind on a repeated use. No teleport but still, it could be more clutch to cast sunbeam and vorp the enemy than to use this ability, and they are given daily at comparable levels. Actually, Sunbeam might even come earlier.

[bendking]

Spells,rage, or any limited resources are not "sustainable" which was why I was curious on what they considered constant DPR.

Which is why I included DPR without Rage, which was 49 DPR. That is only one off the 50 DPR mark.
In regards to the Warlock, he can definitely afford a single Hex each battle considering he has 3 slots at that level and usually no more than 3 combats per short rest.


The Warlock is a terrible benchmark for sustainable damage imo because it's the outlier not the norm. It's weird that Agonizing blast applies to all rays, though even with that you fall short using two different limited resources, sustained damage at 12 would probably be in the decent category at around 30 with pushing 40+ moving into good. If you use a normal caster using cantrips then the damage threshold falls signifcantly, resourcefree (and thus truly sustainable damage) isn't hitting around the 50 mark reliably in tier 3 and would probably struggle to do so in tier 4, just consider the implications of a party of 5 doing that kind of damage. You'd wipe out anything with less than 250hp in one turn without trying, that would make actually challenging monsters comical in their stats.

If you think a basic un-optimized Warlock hurling Eldritch Blasts is an outlier of damage in 5e then we might be playing a different game.
I mean, an Open Hand Monk at level 12, which isn't even a damage focused class, does 29 DPR while using Flurry of Blows, which he most certainly can afford each turn at that level, so I would definitely call that sustained (combats in average are 3 rounds, you're supposed to have 2-3 combats between each short rest according to the PHB).

[Willie the Duck]

Starry Form, where have I seen this before...

OH, RIGHT. The game I still play after 15 years since its release:

Wouldn't say that it's exactly unique, per sé (see spoiler, below), but it's unique in D&D so far, at the very least.

In World of Warcraft, Balance Druids draw their powers from the sun, the moon, and the stars, and their abilities are very similar to the Circle of Stars in this UA. Not saying it's a bad thing. Just saying it's a thing elsewhere.


Going to guess that they both draw their inspiration from Stonehenge and the like. Actual druids are from a lot later than Stonehenge, but conflating the two is a time honored tradition predating both D&D and Warcraft.

[Arkhios]

Going to guess that they both draw their inspiration from Stonehenge and the like. Actual druids are from a lot later than Stonehenge, but conflating the two is a time honored tradition predating both D&D and Warcraft.

To be fair, I didn't say Blizzard/WoW invented this concept. I only pointed out where I've seen this before.

[Dork_Forge]

If you think a basic un-optimized Warlock hurling Eldritch Blasts is an outlier of damage in 5e then we might be playing a different game.
I mean, an Open Hand Monk at level 12, which isn't even a damage focused class, does 29 DPR while using Flurry of Blows, which he most certainly can afford each turn at that level, so I would definitely call that sustained (combats in average are 3 rounds, you're supposed to have 2-3 combats between each short rest according to the PHB).

An Open Hand Monk can afford it because for some weird reason it doesn't get any subclass abilities that consume Ki until 17th level. Even then it's not certain an Open Hand Monk could afford that depending on how much they try to use Stunning Strike, Step of the Wind, Patient Defense of if they throw any deflected missiles back. Even then your Monk example is using a limited resource to increase damage output with presumably a maxed out Dex.

Maybe we have differing opinions of what unoptimized means, maxing your primary stat, taking a damage orientated invocation and spending one of your 3 slots on a damage orientated spells seems to be optimized to me? Just because the Warlock is easy to optimize for at will damage doesn't mean that you aren't optimizing (maxing stat and spendong one of your limited invocations on damage) and doesn't mean that is is a good benchmark for sustained at will damage everyone else can do. Both of your examples have been short rest dependent classes and a Barbarian with two feats (and tbh I'm not entirely sure where your numbers on the Barbarian are coming from, you're clearly accounting for multiple hits with the damage but when you drop rage you only lost one hits worth of Rage bonus damage. Not to mention AC15 seems pretty low for the average enemy at level 12), how about sustained damage on another caster that doesn't get EB+AB?

[Sception]

Damage threshholds only matter for a character for whom damage output is their primary contribution to combat. A wizard can spend all day throwing out buffs, debuffs and battlefield control spells and contribute more than their fair share to party success without dealing a single point of damage.

Artificer conceptually leans support, so it's at least in theory ok for them to fall a bit behind in damage. That said, the parent class artificer features are actually rather limited in both support and damage, which forces artificers to lean heavily on subclass features for their actual contribution, and the damage oriented subclasses actually deliver. Well built Battlesmith numbers well above benchline as already posted. Artillerist does too, reference treantmonk's artillerist video on youtube, but is a bit dependent on fire damage which can cause problems in some campaigns. Armourer looks to me like it will be alright for damage as well, but I admit I haven't run any numbers, nor am I likely to bother while it's still subject to change.

Alchemist is left a bit out in the cold, as it really doesn't get a lot of damage out of subclass features. Personally I don't think it should or needs to, I like the idea of artificer subclasses that doubles down on a supportive role, but alchemist sadly doesn't particularly deliver there either.

But the idea that 'artificer doesn't deal good damage' doesn't really hold water, partially because they shouldn't have to in order to be a fully contributing party member but mostly because most artificer subclasses, all but the alchemist really, do actually deal perfectly fine damage, well above the 'warlock with agonizing blast and hex' benchmark at nearly all levels.

[dreast]

If you use FW's DS with dual wielding, wouldn't it activate after the attack action? If so, DS would only make the one bonus attack count as magical.
Probably not RAI but it seems RAW to me.

Since day one of 5e, the developers haven’t been able to decide if they want a “stack/intent”, MtG model of actions per turn or a strict one-thing-at-a-time model (or even a hybrid with Extra Attack considerations). My tables will always be the “stack/intent” model (you don’t actually have to attack when you take the attack action, so long as you do nothing else that requires an action that turn but attack), because I’m always for greater player flexibility. As the DM, I do not fear the players, for lo, my power is infinite. This also makes Shield Mastery worth taking. I’ll point out that at level 5, a DW FW Ranger makes three attacks per turn and can use their “smite” on two of them, so long as they hit two different creatures, by the “hybrid” model.

Ask your DM about action ordering today!

[Chaosmancer]

Since day one of 5e, the developers haven’t been able to decide if they want a “stack/intent”, MtG model of actions per turn or a strict one-thing-at-a-time model (or even a hybrid with Extra Attack considerations). My tables will always be the “stack/intent” model (you don’t actually have to attack when you take the attack action, so long as you do nothing else that requires an action that turn but attack), because I’m always for greater player flexibility. As the DM, I do not fear the players, for lo, my power is infinite. This also makes Shield Mastery worth taking. I’ll point out that at level 5, a DW FW Ranger makes three attacks per turn and can use their “smite” on two of them, so long as they hit two different creatures, by the “hybrid” model.

Ask your DM about action ordering today!

I don't use the terms, but I use the method. It can be a major pain to remember all of that stuff and get it in the right order, and usually as long as the players have the correct intent I don't care about the precise ordering of effects

[sambojin]

Expected damage is a bunk expectation. I mean, what's your expected damage at lvl2? Because a Moon druid can be charging around as a Warhorse or Deinonychus or Bear or Direwolf and be putting everyone else to shame. Twice per short rest, for an hour per time. 19-37 free HP a go, and even if it was 100% to-hit on you (it's not), that would be scary.

So can a Stars Druid at lvl4 as a Frilled Deathspitter, *with* 3x +5 1d6+3 attacks *and* one bonus action ranged spell attack, with 1d8+Wis damage for their short-rest "nova" for 10 minutes +shooty/2hrs *just a killer dino* thing. Or can go pretend-thrower spam with a 15/30' ranged +5 to-hit, DC13 Con for half, 4d8 poison shooty, with the above bonus action attack alongside it. Oh, and it frigging blinds them until the end of your next turn if they fail the save, which is still spell-slot worthy at this level. No recharge or anything needed, just keep spitting/hitting them with it. Better at melee combat or close-ranged shooting than almost anything else at that level. Didn't even use a spell slot, and they've got 4/3 lvl1/2 slots by then, that can do some extra damage stuff if you want. And, it's 18 free HP every time you do half of it (the 2-hours long, 3x attack part, or poison shooty, no bonus action shooting paid for yet) with wildshape too.

Then a Fighter expects something else at 5th, then a Paladin at 6th, depending on how they're built. But druids still do a thing. They're not even a damagey class (except, they are, until about lvl4-6).

But, wait, wildshape doesn't keep up.... Nope, but spells do. Yet, that level 2-6 time is *really* important. It helps you not die due to HP loss.

Grabbing lvl12 as the only level that is a decent comparison is silly. That's almost the level where it's least comparable, because everyone can do the thing they actually do, be it damage, de/buffing, control, or anything. Literally the most irrelevant time in a campaign. You can start to look at level 2-4 spell slots as "at-will/inexhaustable" resources for casters with slot Regen or good short-rest resources. So they're sustained damage/control/buffs-for-extra-damage. Or a rogue's skills "done", so they can almost always "do their thing". Or a fighter to be going "wow, I wish I had some spell slots, to add to all this "at will/inexhaustable damage me and everyone else can do now"". A lot of these characters also do varying degrees of control/debuff as well. And it's rare that DnD is a one player game, which makes this a very hard-to-do comparison. You don't even want to know how much a Moon or Shepherd druid loves having someone else on the team that can prone/restrain/blind/paralyze people for them.

A level 1 Life cleric does plenty of "damage" with reasonable use of Bless or Healing Word. Still does it at level 12. Never had to roll a damage die to do it. I'd still expect them to add damage that way, every once in a while, when they weren't doing other stuff. And they still would. Almost inexhaustably at lvl12, even after they'd run out of level 3+ spell slots (well, 7 times a day, but that's plenty if it's all just combat simulatory, if that's all they did after running out of every other spell slot, over 4-8 encounters in a day. They've got 4/3/3/3/2/1 slots per day, 12+Wis chosen, choose your spells from the whole list, with bonus extras you don't have to choose. They'll be fine).

"Oh noes! The Druid made another 4 warhorses appear and charge/prone and bonus stomp the enemy! I definitely know the Artificer won't thunder-punch the rest of them to death while they're on the ground/make everything awesomely crispy straight afterwards...". Artificer is fine on damage. They're at about druid level, but a bit lower early-on. They tend to diverge in what they do, and how much of it, a little after the thing above. Lvl12 powerful? Don't know. But most stuff is by that point, if you do it right.

I mean, can it have 3-4 attacks by level 5-6, and summon an extra 4-16 relevant attacks with a spell for an hour, a couple of times a day? Because, if it can't..... Lol.


(if you want to talk "optimized" characters, then yes, unfortunately, you have to allow a certain amount of "official" WotC material in. And that means Frilled Deathspitters for Druids from Ixalan. CR1/2, yep, all good. Your mentor either planeshifted you there for tutelage (probably to learn about magic and nature and awesome dinosaurs) or they're a "counts as" some other horrible beast 'o death you've seen. Backstory that trite in, make it AL legal :)
There was even an adventure there, AL approved, "X Marks the Spot". It gave them 20Str by accident. So Planeshift: Ixalan is the updated "official" version of this creature's "beast template stats". So, yep. They're the downgraded "this seems fine" version. Huzzah!)

[sambojin]

Just taking it to its logical conclusion, at least on rules applicable stuff, not only is the *Stars* Druid not bad, it can give another character shoulder cannons. Because, for once in a Druid's life, you can take Mounted Combatant as a feat.

Frilled Deathspitters are small. You can ride around on the uber-damage paladin stated above^, that we must all measure our lvl12 damage by, at lvl4. And just act as shoulder cannons for funsies. And possibly outdamage him/her for a few levels. Well, until a bit before level 12, at least.

You can coincidentally choose if the poor chivalrous fool below you gets hit or not, when other things take a swing at him. And some of those fools can automatically give disadvantage to attacks against you if he wants (ally being attacked within X feet).

Well, it wasn't really the logical conclusion. But why fight? When you can be a custom super-mech, as a party?

[Sception]

I do like 'warlock with hex and, from level 2, agonizing blast' as a baseline benchmark for decent damage. It's not bad, if not amazing, not complicated, and scales reasonably. It you're meeting or exceeding that for typical damage output than you're doing fine as a damage dealer. Obviously some builds do better, sometimes much better, especially if you narrow your view to particular level ranges, but D&D is a cooperative game, you don't always have to do the most possible. If you meet that benchmark as a damage dealer then you're pulling your weight.

Of course the benchmark is only relevant if dealing damage is the main way you're contributing to battle. Buffing, debuffing, battlefield control, tanking, support... there's a lot of ways to meaningfully contribute to combat that aren't primarily about knocking enemies out with hp damage. Damage is only the mist easily quantifiable means of contributing in combat, and in less combat oriented campaigns you might not even need every party member to 'pull their weight' in a fight to begin with.

[Chaosmancer]

I do like 'warlock with hex and, from level 2, agonizing blast' as a baseline benchmark for decent damage. It's not bad, if not amazing, not complicated, and scales reasonably. It you're meeting or exceeding that for typical damage output than you're doing fine as a damage dealer. Obviously some builds do better, sometimes much better, especially if you narrow your view to particular level ranges, but D&D is a cooperative game, you don't always have to do the most possible. If you meet that benchmark as a damage dealer then you're pulling your weight.

Of course the benchmark is only relevant if dealing damage is the main way you're contributing to battle. Buffing, debuffing, battlefield control, tanking, support... there's a lot of ways to meaningfully contribute to combat that aren't primarily about knocking enemies out with hp damage. Damage is only the mist easily quantifiable means of contributing in combat, and in less combat oriented campaigns you might not even need every party member to 'pull their weight' in a fight to begin with.

Honestly if I ever need to talk about the average damage a character should expect to deal every round in 5e. I go with 1d8+mod per attack.

That is a fighter with a longsword and shield, or an archer with a longbow. Which seems to me to be about as bog standard as you can get. If you want to use standard array and work that as a baseline, then we are talking 1d8+3 or about 7.5 damage a round (considering level 2)


The only problem with using that as a bar, is you can quickly see how many builds meet or exceed that. But, I think that is the point of 5e. Building a character who can meet the minimum DPR bar is easy. The warlock you mentioned without hex, is doing 1d10+mod. With hex adding a d6 you suddenly become above the curve by a solid bit.

But, I also agree that DPR is generally a limited measure of a character's impact on a fight. I had an artificer that cast Web and made it so half of the enemies were unable to reach us and deal damage. Hard to quantify that, but clearly it would have had a large impact on the fight and how it went.

[stoutstien]

Honestly if I ever need to talk about the average damage a character should expect to deal every round in 5e. I go with 1d8+mod per attack.

That is a fighter with a longsword and shield, or an archer with a longbow. Which seems to me to be about as bog standard as you can get. If you want to use standard array and work that as a baseline, then we are talking 1d8+3 or about 7.5 damage a round (considering level 2)


The only problem with using that as a bar, is you can quickly see how many builds meet or exceed that. But, I think that is the point of 5e. Building a character who can meet the minimum DPR bar is easy. The warlock you mentioned without hex, is doing 1d10+mod. With hex adding a d6 you suddenly become above the curve by a solid bit.

But, I also agree that DPR is generally a limited measure of a character's impact on a fight. I had an artificer that cast Web and made it so half of the enemies were unable to reach us and deal damage. Hard to quantify that, but clearly it would have had a large impact on the fight and how it went.

I use the '2(duelist + 1d8 weapon+ mod)' as my bar for at-will. Triple this for burst damage.
You can do this then damage is covered.

[Misterwhisper]

Brief rundown:

Armorer looks great, might actually play an artificer with that.

A not to those saying it is too much, all subclasses are centered on using int to hit. Alch throws cantrips with int to damage, artillerist shoots with a bonus action with int, battlesmith while boring as dirt uses weapons with int.

The Druid subclass looks rather dull so don’t really care.

Ranger is more bandaid on a bad class instead of them just admitting base phb ranger is meh and changing it.

[Kane0]

Ranger is more bandaid on a bad class instead of them just admitting base phb ranger is meh and changing it.

Hallelujah!

Although i do happen to find the glowstick druid pretty appealing.

[stoutstien]

Been crunching math on the Armor smith and the THP is strange. If you focus on mitigation you can be king. Taking about 10% less damage at will than a totem barbarian with a shield raging. Also due to not having any subclass features that can possibly drain spell slots you end up with more AE, shield, or other spell based avoidance/mitigation.

Haste + SSI mirror image is a solid round one opener.

Damage output is ok but can't keep up with Battle smith or artillerist.

[Damon_Tor]

Since day one of 5e, the developers haven’t been able to decide if they want a “stack/intent”, MtG model of actions per turn or a strict one-thing-at-a-time model (or even a hybrid with Extra Attack considerations). My tables will always be the “stack/intent” model (you don’t actually have to attack when you take the attack action, so long as you do nothing else that requires an action that turn but attack), because I’m always for greater player flexibility. As the DM, I do not fear the players, for lo, my power is infinite. This also makes Shield Mastery worth taking. I’ll point out that at level 5, a DW FW Ranger makes three attacks per turn and can use their “smite” on two of them, so long as they hit two different creatures, by the “hybrid” model.

Ask your DM about action ordering today!

I houseruled away the need to take the attack action to use the bonus action shove from shield mastery entirely. If the hard wants to take the feat so he can shove a guy 5 feet away then cast a spell at him, why not? Requiring the attack action is a needless complication.

My houserule for two weapon fighting removes the bonus action entirely, so that's a different matter.

[Dork_Forge]

Been crunching math on the Armor smith and the THP is strange. If you focus on mitigation you can be king. Taking about 10% less damage at will than a totem barbarian with a shield raging. Also due to not having any subclass features that can possibly drain spell slots you end up with more AE, shield, or other spell based avoidance/mitigation.

Haste + SSI mirror image is a solid round one opener.

Damage output is ok but can't keep up with Battle smith or artillerist.

Does the Armor Smith come out on top when you factor in the larger hit die of the Barbarian? With the effect of the thunder fists it seems like a solid tank option all round.

[Kane0]

How about an ancestral barb?

[stoutstien]

Does the Armor Smith come out on top when you factor in the larger hit die of the Barbarian? With the effect of the thunder fists it seems like a solid tank option all round.

The barb can still eat more damage but as far as flat out survivability the AS is ahead and the Battle smith is still above both of them.

The haste round one allows an extra thunder gauntlet attack if wanted. The mirror image option is just for mitigation if the enemy doesn't have true sight. Could push it back to round 2 so you have the disadvantage effect up right away.

[stoutstien]

How about an ancestral barb?
I was looking at survivability mostly but I'm working on a party wide mitigation comparison using a mock party in a campaign. Should be able to plug in each and see a general picture.

AG is a hard one to compare side by side. In fights with 1-2 targets it dominates but more than that I'm expecting it to slip behind.

[Ignimortis]

Iron Man Artificer is what I initially expected from the class. Might actually play one if I ever return to 5e. Dunno why people keep complaining about subclasses being OP, it's not like 5e's PHB power level isn't pretty dull for some classes. Ranger could use the help, and Artificer is still not as good as Paladin even with Armorer.

[Dork_Forge]

The barb can still eat more damage but as far as flat out survivability the AS is ahead and the Battle smith is still above both of them.

The haste round one allows an extra thunder gauntlet attack if wanted. The mirror image option is just for mitigation if the enemy doesn't have true sight. Could push it back to round 2 so you have the disadvantage effect up right away.

How is the Battle Smith pushing ahead for survivability? Is it the Defensive Pounce and extra hp of the SD?

[stoutstien]

How is the Battle Smith pushing ahead for survivability? Is it the Defensive Pounce and extra hp of the SD?
SSI(warding bond) and tiny servant mostly. I did count 1/2 HP of the SD as EHP as well.
The AS comes out ahead in scenarios with hordes of lower CR NPCs. For example I pitted 100 orcs vs a lv 15 AS and tried to best them with using as little resources as possible.

I'm going to use hobgoblins next because they would be smart enough to use the help action.

[Makorel]

SSI(warding bond) and tiny servant mostly. I did count 1/2 HP of the SD as EHP as well.

That's a hilarious set up, though I can't help but question how effective it is considering the Tiny Servant has about 10 hp to rub together.

[stoutstien]

That's a hilarious set up, though I can't help but question how effective it is considering the Tiny Servant has about 10 hp to rub together.

Mostly it's for the bonus AC and saves. Getting to 30 AC before shield means that The battle Smith can get to the point that the only time they take any large chunk of damage is a critical hit. The Tiny servant reducing even one by 1/2 is huge jump in staying power.

[Misterwhisper]

Mostly it's for the bonus AC and saves. Getting to 30 AC before shield means that The battle Smith can get to the point that the only time they take any large chunk of damage is a critical hit. The Tiny servant reducing even one by 1/2 is huge jump in staying power.

That is why crafting your own Adamantine Plate is so useful.
Craft it then enchant it yourself if you have to.

Great AC, No Crits, no disadvantage on stealth and no Str requirement.

[stoutstien]

That is why crafting your own Adamantine Plate is so useful.
Craft it then enchant it yourself if you have to.

Great AC, No Crits, no disadvantage on stealth and no Str requirement.

Adamantine plate is considered magical so adding infusions to it is probably a no go.
I agree that once you get to a certain point adamantine plate will probably out preform the basic +2 AC armor you can make. Real issue is crafting is 100% DM dependant so I didn't include any of that or additional magical items.