Well they wayfarers guide came out and articifier isn't included so I've just stopped assuming that dndbeyond will ever include articifier and they've straight out stated they aren't going to include class creation. I like dndbeyond quite a bit but these decisions are definitely stifling my standard game play style as I like tweaking classes to suit my world and the articifier allows me to add a new type of gameplay that doesn't exist elsewhere.
Truth is the mystic is overpowered and even if it appeared I wouldn't allow it but with class creation capabilities and the mystic I could hammer it out into the 4 or 5 classes it should be.
Just wanted to touch on Psionics not being a big part of Eberron, I don't feel this is necessarily true. They even have an entire race of beings that have psionic abilities by default, The Kalashtar:
The way I see it, psionics are to Eberron as samurai and ninja are to the Forgotten Realms. They exist on the planet, and sometimes show up in the "core" part of the setting, but they mainly do their thing way over there (samurai and ninja over in Kara-Tur, and psionics on Sarlona). So there's a place for them, but you could also easily ignore them.
Just wanted to touch on Psionics not being a big part of Eberron, I don't feel this is necessarily true. They even have an entire race of beings that have psionic abilities by default, The Kalashtar:
The way I see it, psionics are to Eberron as samurai and ninja are to the Forgotten Realms. They exist on the planet, and sometimes show up in the "core" part of the setting, but they mainly do their thing way over there (samurai and ninja over in Kara-Tur, and psionics on Sarlona). So there's a place for them, but you could also easily ignore them.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Not as central to the setting as Artificers or some of the iconic races that are already in.
It's killing me though, I've been spoofing mystic with a wizard class and that was working well until I wanted to multiclass Bard and now I can't do it without messing up the way I kluged psionic abilities together via wizard spells. I mean it'll probably work but I'll be doing more self-management than I will be getting it handled by DNDBeyond which defeats some of the purpose.
Just wanted to touch on Psionics not being a big part of Eberron, I don't feel this is necessarily true. They even have an entire race of beings that have psionic abilities by default, The Kalashtar:
The way I see it, psionics are to Eberron as samurai and ninja are to the Forgotten Realms. They exist on the planet, and sometimes show up in the "core" part of the setting, but they mainly do their thing way over there (samurai and ninja over in Kara-Tur, and psionics on Sarlona). So there's a place for them, but you could also easily ignore them.
Not exactly true, the country of Adar is the birthplace of the Kalashtar race in the Eberron setting, it's an entire race of people with Psionic Talent. So, while I feel one of the key pieces of the Eberron setting is definitely it's high magic nature, I would contend that Psionics is just as integral. But that, in my opinion, is one of the greatest things about Eberron; literally anything you want to play can be factored into the setting in some way shape or form and it's not disruptive.
Not exactly true, the country of Adar is the birthplace of the Kalashtar race in the Eberron setting, it's an entire race of people with Psionic Talent.
That's my point. Adar and Sarlona in general are where psionics are prominent on Eberron, and that's a different continent way over there, which is quite isolationist to boot. It's very easy to run an Eberron campaign that never has anything to do with psionics, but there's a pretty clear role for it if you want it. This is different from e.g. the Forgotten Realms, where psionics is pretty much a non-thing, or Dark Sun, where it is front and center to the point where in the 2e version everyone had psionic powers.
If I were to make a top three list of concepts that are important to Eberron, in my opinion, psionics would not be on it. The top three items would be "The Last War is over, sort of", "Low-level near-industrial magic is very common, particularly in the form of Dragonmarks", and "Gods do not interfere directly in the world and alignments are far less set in stone except for spiritual beings, which results in more shades of grey". If Eberron were a pizza, these would be the crust, tomato sauce, and cheese - without those, it's not a pizza*. Psionics are one of the toppings you can add to that. So is exploring Xen'drik, Sharn intrigue, Daelkyr-spawn vs Gatekeepers, the Lords of Dust, Karrnathi necromancers, the Lord of Blades, and so on - they're all part of the spectrum of toppings you can use on your Eberron pizza in whatever configuration you like.
I mean, I want psionics in my Eberron campaign, but it's not a necessity. It's like pineapple on my pizza - if the pizza joint is out of pineapple, I'll make do without. And if there aren't any workable psionics rules, I'll do without for Eberron.
* Yeah yeah, I know about "white pizzas". It's not a perfect analogy.
For psionics Mike Mearls did mention it will be added when they add Dark Sun to 5e.
And as mentioned before artificer is being worked on I think they were hoping to have it out December in prior interviews but in September/October in one of Jeremy Crawfords Sage advice videos he mentioned they handed Artificer to Keith Baaker and got an essay of feedback in return so were going through that and making alterations based on the feedback. When it is done it will be added to WGtE which is on DDB. Though based of the amount of feedback we may see it early next year at the latest.
Please note everything have said is based off past interviews with wizards they have put out but of course they could easily change their minds so grains of salt everywhere.
Yeah biggest problem I've heard repeatedly with artificer is that the class that builds stuff just makes magic items and it doesn't feel like its own thing. But I'm glad they're digging into it. I heard about Dark Sun being potentially on the table for the future, but the fact that they're waiting for DS means I shouldn't hold my breath, that'll be a while.
Yeah biggest problem I've heard repeatedly with artificer is that the class that builds stuff just makes magic items and it doesn't feel like its own thing. But I'm glad they're digging into it. I heard about Dark Sun being potentially on the table for the future, but the fact that they're waiting for DS means I shouldn't hold my breath, that'll be a while.
Basically, the 3e artificer had two aspects to it.
1. Making magic items. In 3e, item creation required that you had the right feat for the item type, that you knew the right spells or could access them in some other fashion, and that you spent a certain amount of time, money, and XP. Artificers got the feats for free, an amount of "free" XP to spend on items each level, could bypass spell prerequisites, and had access to other feats that made item creation faster, cheaper, or less XP-intensive. So they were really, really good at making magic items for both themselves and the rest of the party. Magic items were also way more formalized in 3e, with PCs being expected to have a certain amount of magic at various levels in order to keep up with the challenges. A party with an artificer would likely be way better equipped than expected. This aspect would be very problematic in 5e which is way more fuzzy when it comes to items, and doesn't really expect PCs to have them.
2. Buff spells. 3e artificers could cast spells about as well as bards (who in 3e could not cast as well as clerics or wizards - they topped out with 6th level spells, whereas semi-casters like rangers and paladins maxed out at 4th level). However, their spell list was pretty much all buffs, flavored as creating temporary magic items (e.g. when an artificer cast shield of faith on someone, the in-game explanation is that they craft a temporary ring of protection +2). They also had some spells with direct effects, but most of those only worked on objects and/or constructs. This is where I think the 5e artificer would have to focus.
The result was a class which would likely use many consumables (scrolls at lower levels and of rarely-used spells, wands at mid-levels and staffs at higher levels) and be buffed to the gills, and was powerful in ways that weren't immediately apparent when reading the class (since a large portion of the class's power is in what items they have).
I made my own version a while back (though I never playtested it), which in large parts were based on the bard chassis with with a different spell list and many abilities flavored with alchemy or artifice (e.g. instead of Bardic Inspiration, they would hand out single-use gizmos that would do the same thing).
Really need the mystic. Kind of important for a lot of the campaigns I wanna run and it's hard to get it into D&D beyond with how the system works as it is.
I think when homebrew base classes come to D&D Beyond, people can make the older UA classes available as homebrew (assuming it doesn't violate any licensing). I personally would like the revised ranger, but because that's older homebrew, it's not going to be on D&D Beyond. This would be a good way to include all UA content (old and new) and make it publicly available.
not wanting to be a dick or a jerk and my next sentences aren't meant to be just that... but...
isn't most of the homebrew classes i have seen easily able to just be archetypes to begin with ? seems to me from many classes, which is why i rarely add classes to begin with. like most DMs just wants the first 10 levels to have all the archetype features right away and thus create their own whacky classes just for the sake of gaining much more powers at lower levels. if we do take matt mercer blood hunters class, it is great a class, different enough to warrant its own class. but if you look at it correctly, most of the features would of easily been added to a barbarian or fighter archetype. the reality of archetypes is that they leave enough places to make literal changes to the fundamental classes.
that said, i understand people and their need for new classes, but what i dont understand are those wanting new classes for things that are already in the game itself. i am already guilty of having created a druid archetype like thing for sorcerer and a dragon related archetype for warlocks because why not ? but let's be honest, any of those sub classes i could of made into a full class... why didn't i ? simply because if i need to add 50x features, then there is something i'm doing wrong to begin with.
now... if the features are worth it, it doesn't matter that there is less if they are worth it, and thus i do see the wizard having an artificer support archetype instead of being full blown into it. i just think the archetype features needs to be powerfull, which they weren't back when they tryed it. as for the mystic, do we really need a another sorcerer type class ? i mean why create something thats already there. using psionic points when the sorcerer already has his sorcery points, is kinda redundant. its easy to make the mystic into a class for the sorcerer. as for spells he uses, seriously... the mystic has always been way too overpowered... and by definition, i created a lot of psychic with the current spell system. seeing all this, i can easily see the mystic as being just a sorcerer archetype.
not that i want these to be, WotC does whatever they want... but i find it pretty narrow for people to say they warrant full on classes when you look at what systems we already have and the fact that we can already do pretty much whatever people have been asking with the current system.
the last thing i'll say... is clarification on what beyond already said... "If WotC has archiveed it and confirmed it as such, then its gonna be removed from beyond." both classes, mystic and artificer, were confirmed archived, hence why they were deployed to the DMs Guide. so wanting them to come back here is useless, because both classes were confirmed to be archived by WotC and thus not official anymore. same with pretty much all of the UA before 2018. many UA elements got into eberrons and ravnica, thus they were removed from the UA database. thats why we dont have much UA content right now, because its all came out in official book. i doubt this to change anytime soon, i believe beyond will continu to do this. now it has been confirmed that new versions of the mystic and artificer are coming our way, and i doubt they will be even remotely close to what they used to be. Mystic was way too strong, the ability to cast any spells without any VSM is way too strong in any games... and artificer was just a big gun on wheels... it prooved pretty pathetic. so i, again, doubt they will be anywhere near what they were when first introduced in UA.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
You've made some good points but to me Mystic and Artificer deserve there own classes, they both offer interesting and different ideas, like mystic's point over spell slots mechanic, and Articer is well, a magic gun wielding machine user, which could also be intereting if done right. As for the RP part Mystic is a mind master, having intellect but also a strong connection to the world, partly mixing monk and wizard but in a new and flavorful way, and Articer also has RP potential with using machinery and stuff like that.
I made this for thinking both where already out, this form has proven me wrong and also sparked some intresting debates, thanks for this experience
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Marvarax andSora (Dragonborn) The retired fighter and WIP scholar - Glory
Brythel(Dwarf), The dwarf with a gun - survival at sea
Jaylin(Human), Paladin of Lathander's Ancient ways - The Seven Saints (Azura Claw)
Urselles(Goblin), Cleric of Eldath- The Wizard's challenge
Viclas Tyrin(Half Elf), Student of the Elven arts- Indrafatmoko's Defiance in Phlan
Sorry to ask but I was browsing the site and was wondering, the Mystic class as in the psychic stuff from Unearthed Arcana that's in the Wayfarer's Ebberon book? Is it a sub-class or something else entirely?
Well it's hit die was a D8 so for one of my players I used the cleric. Be warned any attempt to make it work currently will be incredibly janky until it gets an official release and put on DDB.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Loex - A Lizardfolk Lvl 4/6/4 Hexblade Profane Blood Hunter/ Battlesmith Artificer/ Cleric of the Forge Arborea - A Warforged Lvl 1 Hexblade Warlock
Well they wayfarers guide came out and articifier isn't included so I've just stopped assuming that dndbeyond will ever include articifier and they've straight out stated they aren't going to include class creation. I like dndbeyond quite a bit but these decisions are definitely stifling my standard game play style as I like tweaking classes to suit my world and the articifier allows me to add a new type of gameplay that doesn't exist elsewhere.
Truth is the mystic is overpowered and even if it appeared I wouldn't allow it but with class creation capabilities and the mystic I could hammer it out into the 4 or 5 classes it should be.
The Wayfarer's Guide to Eberron is not complete yet - think of it as in Early Access currently.
Keith Baker & Mike Mearls have both confirmed that they are working on a new version of the Artificer, for inclusion in WGtE.
When that's added, it will be on D&D Beyond. :)
edit: I posted Alchemist when I meant Artificer
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
The way I see it, psionics are to Eberron as samurai and ninja are to the Forgotten Realms. They exist on the planet, and sometimes show up in the "core" part of the setting, but they mainly do their thing way over there (samurai and ninja over in Kara-Tur, and psionics on Sarlona). So there's a place for them, but you could also easily ignore them.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Not as central to the setting as Artificers or some of the iconic races that are already in.
It's killing me though, I've been spoofing mystic with a wizard class and that was working well until I wanted to multiclass Bard and now I can't do it without messing up the way I kluged psionic abilities together via wizard spells. I mean it'll probably work but I'll be doing more self-management than I will be getting it handled by DNDBeyond which defeats some of the purpose.
Not exactly true, the country of Adar is the birthplace of the Kalashtar race in the Eberron setting, it's an entire race of people with Psionic Talent. So, while I feel one of the key pieces of the Eberron setting is definitely it's high magic nature, I would contend that Psionics is just as integral. But that, in my opinion, is one of the greatest things about Eberron; literally anything you want to play can be factored into the setting in some way shape or form and it's not disruptive.
That's my point. Adar and Sarlona in general are where psionics are prominent on Eberron, and that's a different continent way over there, which is quite isolationist to boot. It's very easy to run an Eberron campaign that never has anything to do with psionics, but there's a pretty clear role for it if you want it. This is different from e.g. the Forgotten Realms, where psionics is pretty much a non-thing, or Dark Sun, where it is front and center to the point where in the 2e version everyone had psionic powers.
If I were to make a top three list of concepts that are important to Eberron, in my opinion, psionics would not be on it. The top three items would be "The Last War is over, sort of", "Low-level near-industrial magic is very common, particularly in the form of Dragonmarks", and "Gods do not interfere directly in the world and alignments are far less set in stone except for spiritual beings, which results in more shades of grey". If Eberron were a pizza, these would be the crust, tomato sauce, and cheese - without those, it's not a pizza*. Psionics are one of the toppings you can add to that. So is exploring Xen'drik, Sharn intrigue, Daelkyr-spawn vs Gatekeepers, the Lords of Dust, Karrnathi necromancers, the Lord of Blades, and so on - they're all part of the spectrum of toppings you can use on your Eberron pizza in whatever configuration you like.
I mean, I want psionics in my Eberron campaign, but it's not a necessity. It's like pineapple on my pizza - if the pizza joint is out of pineapple, I'll make do without. And if there aren't any workable psionics rules, I'll do without for Eberron.
* Yeah yeah, I know about "white pizzas". It's not a perfect analogy.
For psionics Mike Mearls did mention it will be added when they add Dark Sun to 5e.
And as mentioned before artificer is being worked on I think they were hoping to have it out December in prior interviews but in September/October in one of Jeremy Crawfords Sage advice videos he mentioned they handed Artificer to Keith Baaker and got an essay of feedback in return so were going through that and making alterations based on the feedback. When it is done it will be added to WGtE which is on DDB. Though based of the amount of feedback we may see it early next year at the latest.
Please note everything have said is based off past interviews with wizards they have put out but of course they could easily change their minds so grains of salt everywhere.
Loex - A Lizardfolk Lvl 4/6/4 Hexblade Profane Blood Hunter/ Battlesmith Artificer/ Cleric of the Forge
Arborea - A Warforged Lvl 1 Hexblade Warlock
DM - "Malign Intelligence"
Yeah biggest problem I've heard repeatedly with artificer is that the class that builds stuff just makes magic items and it doesn't feel like its own thing. But I'm glad they're digging into it. I heard about Dark Sun being potentially on the table for the future, but the fact that they're waiting for DS means I shouldn't hold my breath, that'll be a while.
Basically, the 3e artificer had two aspects to it.
1. Making magic items. In 3e, item creation required that you had the right feat for the item type, that you knew the right spells or could access them in some other fashion, and that you spent a certain amount of time, money, and XP. Artificers got the feats for free, an amount of "free" XP to spend on items each level, could bypass spell prerequisites, and had access to other feats that made item creation faster, cheaper, or less XP-intensive. So they were really, really good at making magic items for both themselves and the rest of the party. Magic items were also way more formalized in 3e, with PCs being expected to have a certain amount of magic at various levels in order to keep up with the challenges. A party with an artificer would likely be way better equipped than expected. This aspect would be very problematic in 5e which is way more fuzzy when it comes to items, and doesn't really expect PCs to have them.
2. Buff spells. 3e artificers could cast spells about as well as bards (who in 3e could not cast as well as clerics or wizards - they topped out with 6th level spells, whereas semi-casters like rangers and paladins maxed out at 4th level). However, their spell list was pretty much all buffs, flavored as creating temporary magic items (e.g. when an artificer cast shield of faith on someone, the in-game explanation is that they craft a temporary ring of protection +2). They also had some spells with direct effects, but most of those only worked on objects and/or constructs. This is where I think the 5e artificer would have to focus.
The result was a class which would likely use many consumables (scrolls at lower levels and of rarely-used spells, wands at mid-levels and staffs at higher levels) and be buffed to the gills, and was powerful in ways that weren't immediately apparent when reading the class (since a large portion of the class's power is in what items they have).
I made my own version a while back (though I never playtested it), which in large parts were based on the bard chassis with with a different spell list and many abilities flavored with alchemy or artifice (e.g. instead of Bardic Inspiration, they would hand out single-use gizmos that would do the same thing).
New from the todaysMike Mearls Happy Fun hour. We will not see the Artificer this month. But it should be getting a UA release soon. SO maybe jan/feb?
Loex - A Lizardfolk Lvl 4/6/4 Hexblade Profane Blood Hunter/ Battlesmith Artificer/ Cleric of the Forge
Arborea - A Warforged Lvl 1 Hexblade Warlock
DM - "Malign Intelligence"
Really need the mystic. Kind of important for a lot of the campaigns I wanna run and it's hard to get it into D&D beyond with how the system works as it is.
I think when homebrew base classes come to D&D Beyond, people can make the older UA classes available as homebrew (assuming it doesn't violate any licensing). I personally would like the revised ranger, but because that's older homebrew, it's not going to be on D&D Beyond. This would be a good way to include all UA content (old and new) and make it publicly available.
not wanting to be a dick or a jerk and my next sentences aren't meant to be just that... but...
isn't most of the homebrew classes i have seen easily able to just be archetypes to begin with ?
seems to me from many classes, which is why i rarely add classes to begin with. like most DMs just wants the first 10 levels to have all the archetype features right away and thus create their own whacky classes just for the sake of gaining much more powers at lower levels. if we do take matt mercer blood hunters class, it is great a class, different enough to warrant its own class. but if you look at it correctly, most of the features would of easily been added to a barbarian or fighter archetype. the reality of archetypes is that they leave enough places to make literal changes to the fundamental classes.
that said, i understand people and their need for new classes, but what i dont understand are those wanting new classes for things that are already in the game itself.
i am already guilty of having created a druid archetype like thing for sorcerer and a dragon related archetype for warlocks because why not ? but let's be honest, any of those sub classes i could of made into a full class... why didn't i ? simply because if i need to add 50x features, then there is something i'm doing wrong to begin with.
now... if the features are worth it, it doesn't matter that there is less if they are worth it, and thus i do see the wizard having an artificer support archetype instead of being full blown into it. i just think the archetype features needs to be powerfull, which they weren't back when they tryed it. as for the mystic, do we really need a another sorcerer type class ? i mean why create something thats already there. using psionic points when the sorcerer already has his sorcery points, is kinda redundant. its easy to make the mystic into a class for the sorcerer. as for spells he uses, seriously... the mystic has always been way too overpowered... and by definition, i created a lot of psychic with the current spell system. seeing all this, i can easily see the mystic as being just a sorcerer archetype.
not that i want these to be, WotC does whatever they want...
but i find it pretty narrow for people to say they warrant full on classes when you look at what systems we already have and the fact that we can already do pretty much whatever people have been asking with the current system.
the last thing i'll say... is clarification on what beyond already said...
"If WotC has archiveed it and confirmed it as such, then its gonna be removed from beyond."
both classes, mystic and artificer, were confirmed archived, hence why they were deployed to the DMs Guide. so wanting them to come back here is useless, because both classes were confirmed to be archived by WotC and thus not official anymore. same with pretty much all of the UA before 2018. many UA elements got into eberrons and ravnica, thus they were removed from the UA database. thats why we dont have much UA content right now, because its all came out in official book. i doubt this to change anytime soon, i believe beyond will continu to do this. now it has been confirmed that new versions of the mystic and artificer are coming our way, and i doubt they will be even remotely close to what they used to be. Mystic was way too strong, the ability to cast any spells without any VSM is way too strong in any games... and artificer was just a big gun on wheels... it prooved pretty pathetic. so i, again, doubt they will be anywhere near what they were when first introduced in UA.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
You've made some good points but to me Mystic and Artificer deserve there own classes, they both offer interesting and different ideas, like mystic's point over spell slots mechanic, and Articer is well, a magic gun wielding machine user, which could also be intereting if done right. As for the RP part Mystic is a mind master, having intellect but also a strong connection to the world, partly mixing monk and wizard but in a new and flavorful way, and Articer also has RP potential with using machinery and stuff like that.
I made this for thinking both where already out, this form has proven me wrong and also sparked some intresting debates, thanks for this experience
Marvarax and Sora (Dragonborn) The retired fighter and WIP scholar - Glory
Brythel(Dwarf), The dwarf with a gun - survival at sea
Jaylin(Human), Paladin of Lathander's Ancient ways - The Seven Saints (Azura Claw)
Urselles(Goblin), Cleric of Eldath- The Wizard's challenge
Viclas Tyrin(Half Elf), Student of the Elven arts- Indrafatmoko's Defiance in Phlan
Artificer is coming in next months UA and will be on Beyond shortly after that
Full class creation is on the roadmap due to demand.
Adam has confirmed both these things in the dev streams.
D&D Beyond moderator across forums, Discord, Twitch and YouTube. Always happy to help and willing to answer questions (or at least try). (he/him/his)
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Site Rules & Guidelines - Homebrew Rules - Looking for Players and Groups Rules
Sorry to ask but I was browsing the site and was wondering, the Mystic class as in the psychic stuff from Unearthed Arcana that's in the Wayfarer's Ebberon book? Is it a sub-class or something else entirely?
The Mystic was the psionics class from Unearthed Arcana. It is not in the Eberron book but can be found on the WotC website with sufficient google fu.
Loex - A Lizardfolk Lvl 4/6/4 Hexblade Profane Blood Hunter/ Battlesmith Artificer/ Cleric of the Forge
Arborea - A Warforged Lvl 1 Hexblade Warlock
DM - "Malign Intelligence"
What class would you even use as the base for homebrewing it then?
Well it's hit die was a D8 so for one of my players I used the cleric. Be warned any attempt to make it work currently will be incredibly janky until it gets an official release and put on DDB.
Loex - A Lizardfolk Lvl 4/6/4 Hexblade Profane Blood Hunter/ Battlesmith Artificer/ Cleric of the Forge
Arborea - A Warforged Lvl 1 Hexblade Warlock
DM - "Malign Intelligence"
So I'm guessing this got pushed back really far...