Artificers should get Tools' expertise earlier

[diplomancer]

Expertise, in general, is too much of a defining feature to be left to 6th level. If you want to substitute a rogue in the trap disarming/lock opening department, specially on a mid-Dex character, you kind of need it. On the other hand, Tool's Expertise is not that powerful- apart from Thieves's Tools (which are still situational) all the others are more flavour than power.

It seems that they did it so as to not make 6th level look like a dead level, earlier levels are packed with features. But even moving it forward to, say, 3rd level, 6th level is definitely not a dead level, as Artificers get new and more powerful infusions at this level.

[Kane0]

Seconded, ive moved it to level 3 in my 'brew

[Burley]

I'm guessing they modeled the pacing of expertise on the Rogue getting it at 6th.

I guess it makes sense to swap the Artificer's 3rd level Right Tool for the Job with 6th level's Tool Expertise. Although... Right Tool is a right tool of an ability and feels even weaker as a 6th level ability. Expertise feels rightly powerful at 6th, but not game breaking at 3rd.

What happens at 6th, then? Two new infusions known and... Can we make Right Tool more impactful? My artificer has used the ability behind the scenes, to craft magic items during a campaign break, but he could also have just purchased woodworking tools.

[Aalbatr0ss]

Artificer already had a huge level 3. Any concern this steps too hard on rogue too early?

[Mastikator]

IMO I disagree. Artificer has access to guidance which is stronger than tool expertise. At level 6 an artificer is arguably better than a rogue at larceny stuff than a rogue, between Boots of Elvenkind, Gloves of Thievery an artificer can easily out-stealth, out-slight of hand, out-investigation, out-theives's tools the rogue.
The rogue still has an edge in perception though and cunning action means they can combat stealth.

[diplomancer]

Artificer already had a huge level 3. Any concern this steps too hard on rogue too early?

I think levels 3-4 is the "goldilocks" zone for features which are important for a class's function but preserving a class niche from dips, that's why I suggested it. Rogues, in my experience at least, usually don't get thieves' tools expertise, exactly because skills have wider application, so it doesn't step on their toes much, I think.

[Pildion]

Expertise, in general, is too much of a defining feature to be left to 6th level. If you want to substitute a rogue in the trap disarming/lock opening department, specially on a mid-Dex character, you kind of need it. On the other hand, Tool's Expertise is not that powerful- apart from Thieves' Tools (which are still situational) all the others are more flavor than power.

It seems that they did it so as to not make 6th level look like a dead level, earlier levels are packed with features. But even moving it forward to, say, 3rd level, 6th level is definitely not a dead level, as Artificers get new and more powerful infusions at this level.

The only time I played an Artificer was with a Rogue in the party. Honestly guidance at these levels is equal to expertise. If we forgot to give the rogue guidance and I did for myself I normally had a better outcome, with only 14 Dex.

[diplomancer]

The only time I played an Artificer was with a Rogue in the party. Honestly guidance at these levels is equal to expertise. If we forgot to give the rogue guidance and I did for myself I normally had a better outcome, with only 14 Dex.

"Artificers are specially good with tools, specially if they use their tools to make magic that makes them good with tools".

I suppose I just don't think Artificers should wait a whole tier and then some to just be good with tools, no magic involved.

[Pildion]

"Artificers are specially good with tools, specially if they use their tools to make magic that makes them good with tools".

I suppose I just don't think Artificers should wait a whole tier and then some to just be good with tools, no magic involved.

In the end, giving them Tool Expertise at level 3 is hardly going to be game breaking. If you want to, I say go for it haha.

[Psyren]

I suppose I just don't think Artificers should wait a whole tier and then some to just be good with tools, no magic involved.

Expertise isn't "good with tools," it's great with tools. Proficiency is good, and they get that at level 1.

[diplomancer]

Expertise isn't "good with tools," it's great with tools. Proficiency is good, and they get that at level 1.

Yes, but so do many classes, or from backgrounds. If they are going to be "the tool guys" (among other things), they need more than proficiency to make it so. Heck, with new Trance rules, Elves are more "tool guys" than artificers before level 6.

[Amnestic]

I don't see the need for this. Proficiency isn't exactly bad for the first 5 levels, and expertise on tools is (mostly) a ribbon at 6th to coincide with their boosted infusion numbers.

It won't break anything to give it to them early but "not breaking the game" isn't always a reason to buff something. If you want to substitute a rogue then...dip into rogue for a level and get that expertise early? Otherwise deal with PB+dex+guidance.


Yes, but so do many classes, or from backgrounds. If they are going to be "the tool guys" (among other things), they need more than proficiency to make it so. Heck, with new Trance rules, Elves are more "tool guys" than artificers before level 6.

Elven Artificers>Elven non-artificers though?

[Mastikator]

"Artificers are specially good with tools, specially if they use their tools to make magic that makes them good with tools".

I suppose I just don't think Artificers should wait a whole tier and then some to just be good with tools, no magic involved.

At level 1 artificers have 3 tool proficiencies, rogues have 1. At level 3 artificers gain one more and rogues may gain one depending on their subclass. They're the "good at tools" class right from the start.

[Psyren]

Yes, but so do many classes, or from backgrounds. If they are going to be "the tool guys" (among other things), they need more than proficiency to make it so. Heck, with new Trance rules, Elves are more "tool guys" than artificers before level 6.

Three tools right from level 1 is not enough to be "the tool guys" or "good at tools?"

[diplomancer]

Three tools right from level 1 is not enough to be "the tool guys" or "good at tools?"

When it can be easily reproduced by getting the right race/backgrounds? No. With Tasha's, a bog standard Mountain Dwarf Barbarian has, just from Race, proficiency in 6 different tools. If "being good with tools" is part of the Artificer schtick, he's going to have to have more than that to show it.

Or would you say that getting 4 skills at level 1, like the Rogue does, is enough to be "the skills guy", making Expertise superfluous, or at least moved all the way to tier 2?



It won't break anything to give it to them early but "not breaking the game" isn't always a reason to buff something. If you want to substitute a rogue then...dip into rogue for a level and get that expertise early? Otherwise deal with PB+dex+guidance.

"Do you want to be really good early on at something your class is supposed to specialize at, like tool use? Why, the solution is to dip another class!"

I find this reasoning quite odd, even before we consider that multiclassing is an optional rule.

[Psyren]

When it can be easily reproduced by getting the right race/backgrounds? No.

But it stacks with those backgrounds. So you're still the best tool guy.

I'm not interested in a 1:1 comparison between rogue and artificer, they have entirely different features so saying one gets expertise at 1st level therefore the other should too isn't reasonable.

[PhantomSoul]

But it stacks with those backgrounds. So you're still the best tool guy.

I'm not interested in a 1:1 comparison between rogue and artificer, they have entirely different features so saying one gets expertise at 1st level therefore the other should too isn't reasonable.

And the comparison isn't really good anyway; everyone gets 4+ skill proficiencies, while anyone could make specific choices to get tool proficiencies. Then subclasses add to it, the subclasses actually fit tools, and their spellcasting feature ties into their tool use, etc.

And really, rogues are clearly the sneak attack class, since bards get expertise and a larger class skill list and earlier ways to boost ability checks!

[Mastikator]

When it can be easily reproduced by getting the right race/backgrounds? No.

Or would you say that getting 4 skills at level 1, like the Rogue does, is enough to be "the skills guy", making Expertise superfluous, or at least moved all the way to tier 2?



"Do you want to be really good early on at something your class is supposed to specialize at, like tool use? Why, the solution is to dip another class!"

I find this reasoning quite odd, even before we consider that multiclassing is an optional rule.

Guild artisan warforged artificer could have 5 tools at level 1 and 6 at level 3. And expert at ALL of them at level 6. That's super duper mega good, actually.

[Amnestic]

"Do you want to be really good early on at something your class is supposed to specialize at, like tool use? Why, the solution is to dip another class!"

I find this reasoning quite odd, even before we consider that multiclassing is an optional rule.

I mean if your stated goal is to be the best at using specifically thieves tools then yes, taking a dip in the specifically thieves tool class is the best option? If you want to be good at artisan tools though, you take the artisan tool class: artificer, of which rogue is no better than you and in fact noticeably worse.

[diplomancer]

Guild artisan warforged artificer could have 5 tools at level 1 and 6 at level 3. And expert at ALL of them at level 6. That's super duper mega good, actually.

Still less than a Mountain Dwarf Barbarian Criminal; And yes, at level 6 you do indeed get better at tools than the Barbarian. But should you really have to wait that long?

[Amechra]

more flavour than power

Be careful not to sacrifice power for flavor! This meme is probably deader than disco, but...

[Mastikator]

Still less than a Guild Artisan Mountain Dwarf Barbarian. And yes, at level 6 you do indeed get better at tools than the Barbarian. But should you really have to wait that long?

A guild artisan mountain dwarf barbarian gets 2 tools. Guild artisan dwarf/warforged/anyracethatgetsonetool artificer gets 5.

5 > 2

Edit-

I think you need to re-read the rules.

Dwarves get 1 tool
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/races#Dwarf

Guild artisan gets 1 tool
https://www.dndbeyond.com/backgrounds/guild-artisan-guild-merchant

Barbarians get no tool proficiencies
https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/barbarian#ClassFeatures

Artificers alone get 3 tools minimum at level one.

[diplomancer]

A guild artisan mountain dwarf barbarian gets 2 tools. Guild artisan dwarf/warforged/anyracethatgetsonetool artificer gets 5.

5 > 2

A Guild Artisan Mountain Dwarf Barbarian gets 7 tools (with Tasha's swapping rules). meanwhile a Guild Artisan Mark of Making Human Artificer (could you even invest more to thematically connect to tools than this?) starts with 5.

Being a dwarf is more relevant to being good with tools than being the class AND the magical human race that's good with tools. I find that odd.

[Mastikator]

A Guild Artisan Mountain Dwarf Barbarian gets 7 tools (with Tasha's swapping rules). meanwhile a Guild Artisan Mark of Making Human Artificer (can you get more thematically connected to tools than this?) starts with 5.

Being a dwarf is more relevant to being good with tools than being the class AND the magical human race that's good with tools. I find that odd.

Okay so a guild artisan mountain dwarf artificer gets 10 tools with those same swapping rules. They'd be able to supplement all those tools with guidance, which is already stronger than expertise. Artificers are better at tools than barbarians.

[PhantomSoul]

A Guild Artisan Mountain Dwarf Barbarian gets 7 tools (with Tasha's swapping rules). meanwhile a Guild Artisan Mark of Making Human Artificer (can you get more thematically connected to tools than this?) starts with 5.

Being a dwarf is more relevant to being good with tools than being the class AND the magical human race that's good with tools. I find that odd.

Ah, I agree that the problem is Tasha's. Twisting things in an undesired or unintended shape does tend to affect their use, and not mentioning that you're doing it doesn't help!

[Psyren]

So don't allow Tasha's swaps if you have a problem with them. They're optional you know :smallconfused:

Also, saying a "magical human" from one setting should be better than a dwarf at tool use is not remotely a given.

[diplomancer]

Okay so a guild artisan mountain dwarf artificer gets 10 tools with those same swapping rules. They'd be able to supplement all those tools with guidance, which is already stronger than expertise. Artificers are better at tools than barbarians.

Artificers are better at tools than Barbarians. No one has never said otherwise, and this was never in question, so I don't know why you mention it now.

But if you create the aforementioned Guild Artisan Mark of Making Artificer Human, and someone else just wanted to play a bog standard Mountain Dwarf Barbarian, it will still feel odd to have the Mountain Dwarf Barbarian better at tools than you for a considerable chunk of your adventuring together.


Ah, I agree that the problem is Tasha's. Twisting things in an undesired or unintended shape does tend to affect their use, and not mentioning that you're doing it doesn't help!

I mentioned it from the beginning, when I first started comparing the Artificer with the Barbarian Mountain Dwarf. Go and check.

And I have no problem with that particular aspect of Tasha's, as a matter of fact.

I just think that the Class that's supposed to be specially good with tools shouldn't wait until Tier 2 to show it, mechanically. I'm sure if I proposed Rogues should wait till level 6 to get all their 4 Expertises, people would be up in arms, correctly.

Tool's Expertise, or even Tool's proficiencies, are not game breaking, and are, in fact, very situational. But when those situations happen, I believe it's one of the times for the Artificer to shine, on its own, with no support from background or race. So why leave it that late? Everyone that's criticizing the suggestion here still hasn't given a good reason for it.

[PhantomSoul]

Artificers are better at tools than Barbarians. No one has never said otherwise, and this was never in question, so I don't know why you mention it now.

The comparisons in the thread definitely seem like motivation, all the more than "tool use" is being reduced to counting proficiencies and describing proficiency (before/without expertise) as not being "good".

[Burley]

Artificers are better at tools than Barbarians. No one has never said otherwise, and this was never in question, so I don't know why you mention it now.

But if you create the aforementioned Guild Artisan Mark of Making Artificer Human, and someone else just wanted to play a bog standard Mountain Dwarf Barbarian, it will still feel odd to have the Mountain Dwarf Barbarian better at tools than you for a considerable chunk of your adventuring together.



I mentioned it from the beginning, when I first started comparing the Artificer with the Barbarian Mountain Dwarf. Go and check.

And I have no problem with that particular aspect of Tasha's, as a matter of fact.

I just think that the Class that's supposed to be specially good with tools shouldn't wait until Tier 2 to show it, mechanically. I'm sure if I proposed Rogues should wait till level 6 to get all their 4 Expertises, people would be up in arms, correctly.

Well, the barbarians you describe are proficient with a lot of tools. Artificers have expertise with a lot of tools. Artificers, literally, are twice as good with tools as the barbarians. And, considering the ability scores a Barbarian would have compared to an Artificers, I'm willing to bet Arties are more than twice as good at tool usage.

[diplomancer]

Well, the barbarians you describe are proficient with a lot of tools. Artificers have expertise with a lot of tools. Artificers, literally, are twice as good with tools as the barbarians. And, considering the ability scores a Barbarian would have compared to an Artificers, I'm willing to bet Arties are more than twice as good at tool usage.

Artificers DO have expertise with tools, true; starting from level 6. Which is my whole point (and the title of this thread, in fact). It should be earlier.

[Mastikator]

Artificers are better at tools than Barbarians. No one has never said otherwise, and this was never in question, so I don't know why you mention it now.

But if you create the aforementioned Guild Artisan Mark of Making Artificer Human, and someone else just wanted to play a bog standard Mountain Dwarf Barbarian, it will still feel odd to have the Mountain Dwarf Barbarian better at tools than you for a considerable chunk of your adventuring together.



I mentioned it from the beginning, when I first started comparing the Artificer with the Barbarian Mountain Dwarf. Go and check.

And I have no problem with that particular aspect of Tasha's, as a matter of fact.

I just think that the Class that's supposed to be specially good with tools shouldn't wait until Tier 2 to show it, mechanically. I'm sure if I proposed Rogues should wait till level 6 to get all their 4 Expertises, people would be up in arms, correctly.To be honest it sounds to me that you're just not happy with how 5th edition binary proficiency system works.

I play with an artificer from levels 2 to 5 and throughout the journey my character was better with thieves tools than the rogue due guidance. At 6th level it's game over for every lock in the game. Expertise and a +5 from Gloves of Thievery and a +1d4 from guidance? The artificer really does not need any kind of buff IMO

[Silpharon]

Don't forget that Tasha's also added All-Purpose Tool. It's conceivable to get an uncommon variant before level 6, and provides proficiency (though not expertise) with any artisan tool.

[Thunderous Mojo]

Perhaps, I am incorrect in this, but the conversation seems to have focused on "Tools", as being mainly Artisan Tools.

Tool Expertise applies to all Tools, which includes: zithers, zeppelins, xylophones, Lamborghinis, olyphants, and chariots to just name a few examples.

An Artificer Entertainer with Tool Expertise, is a master player of any musical instrument they know.

Same goes for driving a cart, or sailing a ship.

In terms of sheer power, moving Tool Expertise to 3rd level, would likely not be unbalancing, but it could allow an Artificer to dominate in situations where Tool use would apply, three levels earlier.

That could certainly impact screen-time...which seems to be what the O.P. wants.

Give the rule change a whirl, and see what happens.🤘

I'd be curious to see myself.
Theoretically, I think the proposed change would be a quality of life improvement for Artificers, as essentially the class would get lower DCs for the actions described in XGE, (to pick an example), starting at 3rd level.

[Greywander]

Reminder that Rune Knight gets tool expertise as early as 3rd level via the fire rune.

As far as doing "rogue stuff", aside from using thieves' tools, you're better off giving your Boots of Elven Kind and Gloves of Thievery and such to the rogue than using them yourself. Being able to share your infused items is a feature of the class. The artificer is very much a support class that is at its best when it's making other party members shine, rather than taking the spotlight for itself. You can keep your infusions to yourself, but that's usually suboptimal.

[Slipjig]

At level 6 an artificer is arguably better than a rogue at larceny stuff than a rogue, between Boots of Elvenkind, Gloves of Thievery an artificer can easily out-stealth, out-slight of hand, out-investigation, out-theives's tools the rogue.

I do need to point that doing so would tie up two of the artificers three active infusion slots, two of his six known infusion slots, and require that he stick to Light Armor. So yes, an Artificer specifically built for infiltration can be as good at it as a Rogue at certain levels, but he's making some serious trade-offs to do so (and still doesn't have access to some of the other key Rogue abilities like Cunning Action or Sneak Attack).

Artificers can be good at lots of things, but they have to plan what they'll be good at level-up, to the exclusion of other options. Infusions Known are a sharply limited resource that can only be swapped at level-up (and even then, it's only one per level). So dedicating a single Known Infusion (let alone multiple Known Infusions) represents a fairly significant choice in character development.

And even if you have a Sneaky Artificer and a Rogue in the same party, they can be complimentary. If I'm the Rogue in this situation, knowing that I have a partner who is going to be a boss at locks and traps means I now have an Expertise slot free that I otherwise probably would have felt compelled to spend on Thieves' Tools.

[Psyren]

Reminder that Rune Knight gets tool expertise as early as 3rd level via the fire rune.

As far as doing "rogue stuff", aside from using thieves' tools, you're better off giving your Boots of Elven Kind and Gloves of Thievery and such to the rogue than using them yourself. Being able to share your infused items is a feature of the class. The artificer is very much a support class that is at its best when it's making other party members shine, rather than taking the spotlight for itself. You can keep your infusions to yourself, but that's usually suboptimal.

Alternatively, be an artificer in a party with no rogue, they fill the role quite well by themselves.

[HPisBS]

Thievery aside, how much does it even matter? The word "check" doesn't even appear in the item crafting rules once, so the impact seems pretty minimal.

[Greywander]

Tool checks are fairly rare, but that's because tools themselves are fairly niche in application. Where skills are broad, tools are niche, so it actually fits with the mechanics for a niche homebrew skill to instead be modeled as a tool proficiency (even if there's no actual tool attached to it, e.g. vehicle proficiencies). For example, I once proposed that the old Use Rope skill could be brought back as a tool proficiency. While anyone can use a rope for pretty standard things, those with proficiency could add it e.g. when tying a complex knot (increasing the DC to untie it) or making a lasso throw.

You can easily go without ever using tools aside from the occasional thieves' tools, but that's largely down to not looking for opportunities to use tools. When you have expertise with disguise kits, you don't really need Disguise/Alter Self (or you could use both for multiple layers of disguise). With expertise in forgery kits, you can get just about any document you need, allowing you to get into places or do things you normally wouldn't be able to without brute force or stealth. And of course there's always crafting, though I'm not sure how often crafting would call for checks, rather than just happening. XGtE also has a list of things you can use tool checks for, with DCs provided, and a lot of them don't even involve actually using the tool, just your knowledge of the tool and the products made with it.

Oddly enough, I think the wording of both Tool Expertise and the Rune Knight's fire rune mean that they would stack with the bard's Jack of all Trades, in that you add half your proficiency bonus but you also double your proficiency bonus, so you end up with standard proficiency with all tools.

[Psyren]

The main use I see for tool proficiency is the Xanathar's rule that if you can get a skill and a tool to apply to the same check and you're proficient in both, you get automatic advantage. So if you have a ton of tool proficiencies (as Artificers do) that encourages you to try incorporating tools into as many of your checks you make as possible, and that creativity can honestly be a win both for you AND the DM. (And best of all, if you're using the tool as part of that check, you can argue for your expertise to apply.)

[stoutstien]

I'll probably get flak for saying it but I don't think expertise for tools should even exist in it's current form. Most skills fall into some kind of opposed check even if it's against a fixed value where tools don't have that support so there's very little difference between having proficiency or not and expertise on top of it. The system just doesn't have the variance capacity for degrees of proficiency with something like tools. You can move all the artisan tool expertise down to level one and leave the thieves tool expertise at level six and it would make no discernible difference.

[Slipjig]

Thievery aside, how much does it even matter? The word "check" doesn't even appear in the item crafting rules once, so the impact seems pretty minimal.

Depends on your DM. If you are using a Disguise Kit or Forger's Tools, it absolutely matters how good you are at it.

And narratively, I think most DMs would say that (for example), proficiency with woodworkers tools might let craft a chair, but expertise would allow you to craft furniture nice enough that someone would mention it in their will. Proficiency = this is a hobby or something I apprenticed in for a few years before running off to be an adventurer; Expertise = I'm a professional-tier craftsman or artist. The difference won't matter in your usual dungeon crawl, but could be important out of it.

[Psyren]

Reminder that most "skill checks" or "tool checks" in this game are not actually those things. Those checks are ability checks, and either your DM asks you to use a specific proficiency in conjunction with that ability check, or you make an argument for being allowed to incorporate that proficiency into what you're doing if your DM doesn't specify otherwise.

So if you're trying to figure out where you should go without getting lost, that's generally a Wisdom check, and both Survival and Cartographer's Tools might be ways you can get your DM to let you add your proficiency bonus to that check. If they agree both can work and you have expertise in only one of them, you still get double the PB. If you're proficient in both and your DM is using the Xanathar's optional rule, you get advantage. (There is no rule for what happens if you have expertise in both, but personally I would treat it almost like Reliable Talent where your lowest possible roll is a 12 or 14 or something.) Similarly, if you're keeping an eye out for secret doors in a castle corridor, then that's also a Wisdom check - and Perception, Carpenter's Tools and Mason's Tools are all ways your GM can decide your PB gets applied to your passive score.

I agree that tool proficiencies are less broadly applicable than skills, but they're still useful. You just might have to be a bit more descriptive with your DM in order to get them into the habit of not overlooking them.

[arnin77]

Artificers DO have expertise with tools, true; starting from level 6. Which is my whole point (and the title of this thread, in fact). It should be earlier.

Does the Skill Expert feat work with tool proficiencies? Maybe a Vhuman Artificer could use that and get Thieves/Tinker's tool expertise at level 1?

[Greywander]

Does the Skill Expert feat work with tool proficiencies? Maybe a Vhuman Artificer could use that and get Thieves/Tinker's tool expertise at level 1?
But why? Feats are super valuable, you're not going to waste one just to get part of a 6th level feature a few levels early.

[arnin77]

But why? Feats are super valuable, you're not going to waste one just to get part of a 6th level feature a few levels early.

..... because you wanted tool expertise earlier..........