Arcane Firearm un-necessarily forces Artillerist to be reliant on cantrips when they have access to lots of other viable ranged options through his access to firearms and infusions such as repeating shot. Arcane Firearm should be applicable to any spell or ranged weapon which has an artificer infusion applied.
Arcane Firearm un-necessarily forces Artillerist to be reliant on cantrips when they have access to lots of other viable ranged options through his access to firearms and infusions such as repeating shot. Arcane Firearm should be applicable to any spell or ranged weapon which has an artificer infusion applied.
Change my mind lol.
I won't change your mind. Because Arcane Firearm works for ANY spell cast through it. Including Fireball and Shatter who have area damage.... so all hit by it take the extra 1d8.
The bit about ranged weapons... well.. that sounds outside of what the Arcane Firearm is supposed to do.
I will also add that the Infusion "Enhanced Arcane Focus" can be applied to the Arcane Firearm, because the AF is not a magical item.
I understand that it applies to all spells. When considering the adventuring day and the limited number of slots Artificer has, I would submit that when attacking it will most frequently be applied to cantrips. This is what I mean when I say they are reliant on cantrips because Arcane Firearm dis-incentivizes other ranged damage options for Artillerist.
I understand it all applies to all spells and yes it applies to your Enhanced Arcane Focus as well. My point is that for a subclass dedicated to ranged attacks and gaining the firearm proficiency, the current iteration of Arcane Firearm dis-incentivizes Artillerists from utilizing their other ranged damage dealing options. I am just saying it should be an even playing field between an artillerist focusing on Cantrip/Spell Damage and an artillerist wanting to focus on Crossbows/Firearms with for instance the repeating shot infusion.
I understand that it applies to all spells. When considering the adventuring day and the limited number of slots Artificer has, I would submit that when attacking it will most frequently be applied to cantrips. This is what I mean when I say they are reliant on cantrips because Arcane Firearm dis-incentivizes other ranged damage options for Artillerist.
The only reason they'll be using cantrips instead of other spells is spell availability. Everything the arcane firearm does for cantrips, it does (often better) for leveled spells.
Artillerist is built to be, basically, the "blaster spellcaster" version of artificer. If "they" had wanted it to be a ranged-weapon artificer (kinda stepping on the battlesmith's toes, there), they would have given artillerist a way to substitute Int for Dex when using ranged weapons.
I understand it all applies to all spells and yes it applies to your Enhanced Arcane Focus as well. My point is that for a subclass dedicated to ranged attacks and gaining the firearm proficiency, the current iteration of Arcane Firearm dis-incentivizes Artillerists from utilizing their other ranged damage dealing options. I am just saying it should be an even playing field between an artillerist focusing on Cantrip/Spell Damage and an artillerist wanting to focus on Crossbows/Firearms with for instance the repeating shot infusion.
Welcome to the world of spell casting.
The reality is that their other ranged options aren't necessarily as good as those cantrips. Particularly after getting leveled a bit. Crossbows and Firearms are going to be secondary in damage without a lot of extra rescources to make them better such as feats and the like that the arcane firearm has nothing to do with. The arcane firearm is all about spells and spell casting. This is not a mistake.
Arcane Firearm doesn't do *anything* until your DM fixes it with a houserule, so it's a bit challenging to discuss what it does across different tables. Unless your firearm has a hole in it, casting through it is not a defined thing and means nothing at all. If your firearm is, say, just a stick, you have no mechanism for casting through it and cannot trigger the ability. I am, as always, convinced Tasha's was never playtested.
If you think it's easy predicting how DMs will fix it, consider the radically different wording on Enhanced Arcane Focus (which, like almost every such rule in the game, only requires you to hold it) and Alchemical Savant, which requires you to use the item as your focus. Which of these was actually intended for Artillerist? Perhaps neither, and they really do intend that you carve a hole in your firearm and cast through the hole? Who even knows.
Arcane Firearm doesn't do *anything* until your DM fixes it with a houserule, so it's a bit challenging to discuss what it does across different tables. Unless your firearm has a hole in it, casting through it is not a defined thing and means nothing at all. If your firearm is, say, just a stick, you have no mechanism for casting through it and cannot trigger the ability. I am, as always, convinced Tasha's was never playtested.
If you think it's easy predicting how DMs will fix it, consider the radically different wording on Enhanced Arcane Focus (which, like almost every such rule in the game, only requires you to hold it) and Alchemical Savant, which requires you to use the item as your focus. Which of these was actually intended for Artillerist? Perhaps neither, and they really do intend that you carve a hole in your firearm and cast through the hole? Who even knows.
this is actually a bunch of BS. It doesn't need fixing. Your going overly literal to create this false equivalency. Casting through it means using it to focus your magic into and then release it from there at your target. That should be blatantly obvious and I think even your aware of that meaning because of various other foci in the game. And the shere meaning of the word Focus itself.
Arcane Firearm doesn't do *anything* until your DM fixes it with a houserule, so it's a bit challenging to discuss what it does across different tables. Unless your firearm has a hole in it, casting through it is not a defined thing and means nothing at all. If your firearm is, say, just a stick, you have no mechanism for casting through it and cannot trigger the ability. I am, as always, convinced Tasha's was never playtested.
What?
It must be a wand, rod, or staff (any of which is an arcane focus), and allows you to use said focus for your artificer spells. Casting "through" merely (obviously) means using that focus for the spell.
Arcane Firearm doesn't do *anything* until your DM fixes it with a houserule, so it's a bit challenging to discuss what it does across different tables. Unless your firearm has a hole in it, casting through it is not a defined thing and means nothing at all. If your firearm is, say, just a stick, you have no mechanism for casting through it and cannot trigger the ability. I am, as always, convinced Tasha's was never playtested.
What?
It must be a wand, rod, or staff (any of which is an arcane focus), and allows you to use said focus for your artificer spells. Casting "through" merely (obviously) means using that focus for the spell.
Obvious for you may not mean obvious for anyone else. You have chosen one of the options I listed (Alchemical Savant, only slightly less bad - Alchemical Savant really doesn't work on cantrips), but why didn't you choose Enhanced Arcane Focus/All-Purpose Tool/every other special focus in the game, which only requires holding the focus? Why didn't you choose a literal interpretation, and you have to drill a hole in your stick?
There's no such thing as casting "through" a focus. That's not how foci work. Like most of Tasha's, this rule was written without any understanding of how the game works, so we're left to guess at what they were trying to say. Ultimately, as a result, we can't really tell people how the rule will work on a table until they talk to their GM, just like trying to cast Charm Person through a glass window.
Arcane Firearm doesn't do *anything* until your DM fixes it with a houserule, so it's a bit challenging to discuss what it does across different tables. Unless your firearm has a hole in it, casting through it is not a defined thing and means nothing at all. If your firearm is, say, just a stick, you have no mechanism for casting through it and cannot trigger the ability. I am, as always, convinced Tasha's was never playtested.
What?
It must be a wand, rod, or staff (any of which is an arcane focus), and allows you to use said focus for your artificer spells. Casting "through" merely (obviously) means using that focus for the spell.
Obvious for you may not mean obvious for anyone else. You have chosen one of the options I listed (Alchemical Savant, only slightly less bad - Alchemical Savant really doesn't work on cantrips), but why didn't you choose Enhanced Arcane Focus/All-Purpose Tool/every other special focus in the game, which only requires holding the focus? Why didn't you choose a literal interpretation, and you have to drill a hole in your stick?
There's no such thing as casting "through" a focus. That's not how foci work. Like most of Tasha's, this rule was written without any understanding of how the game works, so we're left to guess at what they were trying to say. Ultimately, as a result, we can't really tell people how the rule will work on a table until they talk to their GM, just like trying to cast Charm Person through a glass window.
nah, you're being intentionally obtuse.
From the PHB: "An arcane focus is a special item — an orb, a crystal, a rod, a specially constructed staff, a wand-like length of wood, or some similar item — designed to channel the power of arcane spells." D&D 5e is written in natural language, and does not try to define common english words as technical terms. "Channel" -> "through." Easy and obvious. The entire game falls apart if you ignore the basic meanings of words, and you're just cherry-picking random bits to rag on the book.
Edit: seriously, the best thing you can hope to accomplish with this (other than, I guess, performance art) is to confuse people.
I understand it all applies to all spells and yes it applies to your Enhanced Arcane Focus as well. My point is that for a subclass dedicated to ranged attacks and gaining the firearm proficiency, the current iteration of Arcane Firearm dis-incentivizes Artillerists from utilizing their other ranged damage dealing options. I am just saying it should be an even playing field between an artillerist focusing on Cantrip/Spell Damage and an artillerist wanting to focus on Crossbows/Firearms with for instance the repeating shot infusion.
Welcome to the world of spell casting.
The reality is that their other ranged options aren't necessarily as good as those cantrips. Particularly after getting leveled a bit. Crossbows and Firearms are going to be secondary in damage without a lot of extra rescources to make them better such as feats and the like that the arcane firearm has nothing to do with. The arcane firearm is all about spells and spell casting. This is not a mistake.
We will have to agree to disagree on the assertion "This is not a mistake." The entire focus of Artificer is magical gadgets and the entire focus of Artillerist is magical ranged attacks. It seems strange to me to decide at level 5 AFTER granting infusions that enhance your mundane weapons to basically say "You know, lets give a bump in damage output for this class, you know since they don't get Extra Attack, BUT let's make sure they can ONLY use it with half of the skill set we have given them...."
Imagine if Paladin was told they could ONLY use their extra attack when they use Divine Smite. That is effectively what Arcane Firearm does....
The wording on Arcane firearm can also apply to (artificer) spells cast from magic items.
Arcane firearm doesn't specify the rod, wand, or staff can't be a magic item, so it can be applied to a wand of fireballs. Arcane firearm specifies "When you cast an artificer spell through the firearm," for the Artillerist fireball is an artificer spell and casting a spell "from" a magic item is contextually close enough to "through" that it applies as well.
So no, the Artillerist isn't necessarily reliant on cantrips if you don't mind using the charges of a magic item. Provided you get your hands on one.
Arcane firearm essentially lets the artillerist have their cake and eat it too... so long as that cake is an artificer spell with a damage roll. Combined with the Artillerist spell list you can get a lot of mileage out of that extra 1d8. (Alchemical savant on the other hand... is whole can of worms)
Changing Arcane firearm to apply it to a weapon attack is... honestly quite underwhelming? Unless you intend on also giving the Artillerist extra attack that'd at best be just an additional 1d8 on your 1 weapon attack in a turn.
It's just easier to reflavor the arcane firearm as a magic gun that shoots cantrips then to change its (rather excellent) mechanics.
If you want to play an artificer optimized for using magic weapons as your main, go-to attack, play a Battlesmith, not an Artillerist.
You'll get martial weapons, can infuse your favorite one, and use it with Int (your casting stat). You'll also be able to use that weapon as your casting focus, for using those sweet Artificer/Battlesmith spells...
Doesn't seem right to give Artillerist a 1d8 bonus to every attack they ever make (unless, of course, they only make spell attacks).
DS doesn't work with ranged attacks because that would go against the entire theme of the Paladin class being a frontline attacker & defender (heavy armor proficiency, touch based healing abilities, melee based fighting styles, exclusive spells that work on melee weapons only, short range only aura's and aura spells).
Imagine if DS ONLY applied to ranged attacks and it would be a comparable analogy to Arcane Firearm.
I'm not saying change it to ONLY boosting weapon attacks. I am saying for a class that gets limited spell slots and few cantrips but LOTS of options for ranged attack damage, making the big power boost at level 5 only apply to the limited spell slots and few cantrips is a strange class design choice.
If you want to play an artificer optimized for using magic weapons as your main, go-to attack, play a Battlesmith, not an Artillerist.
You'll get martial weapons, can infuse your favorite one, and use it with Int (your casting stat). You'll also be able to use that weapon as your casting focus, for using those sweet Artificer/Battlesmith spells...
Doesn't seem right to give Artillerist a 1d8 bonus to every attack they ever make (unless, of course, they only make spell attacks).
I mean I specifically said it should apply to spells or ranged attacks with infusion weapons , not "every attack they ever make," to keep it thematic. I don't feel like that steps on the toes of Battlesmith and Battlesmith doesn't provide the appropriate fantasy in my mind for an eldritch sniper like the artillerist. If Artificer got a more normal progression of cantrips, I probably wouldn't feel strongly about it but since Mending is essentially an Artificer Tax, having 1 attack cantrip to spam when you run out of your limited spell slots to take advantage of your key level 5 feature is very underwhelming until you hit level 10.
If you want to play an artificer optimized for using magic weapons as your main, go-to attack, play a Battlesmith, not an Artillerist.
You'll get martial weapons, can infuse your favorite one, and use it with Int (your casting stat). You'll also be able to use that weapon as your casting focus, for using those sweet Artificer/Battlesmith spells...
Doesn't seem right to give Artillerist a 1d8 bonus to every attack they ever make (unless, of course, they only make spell attacks).
I mean I specifically said it should apply to spells or ranged attacks with infusion weapons to keep it thematic. I don't feel like that steps on the toes of Battlesmith and Battlesmith doesn't provide the appropriate fantasy in my mind for an eldritch sniper like the artillerist. If Artificer got a more normal progression of cantrips, I probably wouldn't feel strongly about it but since Mending is essentially an Artificer Tax, having 1 attack cantrip to spam when you run out of your limited spell slots to take advantage of your key level 5 feature is very underwhelming until you hit level 10.
Mending is hardly an artificer tax for artillerists...the chances of you needing to heal your cannon between two fights (Mending being essentially non-combat time) inside of the only-1-hour duration is pretty low. It's way way more important for Battlesmith.
Using Arcane Firearm with, say, Firebolt, and possibly Spell Sniper or Elemental Adept or such, is probably the best way to get an "eldritch sniper" concept with Artillerist. Use Fireball for the big guns. Or just thinking of your Eldritch Cannon as a sniper's tool... I think of Battlesmith as (more or less) "ratchet and clank," which definitely includes sniper-rifle-type stuff. An infused ranged weapon, using Int, stacking in an Arcane Jolt, seems like a perfect match for the sniper concept. With a bit of freeform thinking, the Steel Defender could operate like a spotter (the help action, maybe).
(For a proper sniper, neither of those will match a rogue's sneak attack at range from a hidden position, but...)
Arcane Firearm un-necessarily forces Artillerist to be reliant on cantrips when they have access to lots of other viable ranged options through his access to firearms and infusions such as repeating shot. Arcane Firearm should be applicable to any spell or ranged weapon which has an artificer infusion applied.
Change my mind lol.
Arcane Firearm does apply to any Artificer spell, that does damage, cast with that focus. It's not just cantrips.
I won't change your mind. Because Arcane Firearm works for ANY spell cast through it. Including Fireball and Shatter who have area damage.... so all hit by it take the extra 1d8.
The bit about ranged weapons... well.. that sounds outside of what the Arcane Firearm is supposed to do.
I will also add that the Infusion "Enhanced Arcane Focus" can be applied to the Arcane Firearm, because the AF is not a magical item.
I understand that it applies to all spells. When considering the adventuring day and the limited number of slots Artificer has, I would submit that when attacking it will most frequently be applied to cantrips. This is what I mean when I say they are reliant on cantrips because Arcane Firearm dis-incentivizes other ranged damage options for Artillerist.
I understand it all applies to all spells and yes it applies to your Enhanced Arcane Focus as well. My point is that for a subclass dedicated to ranged attacks and gaining the firearm proficiency, the current iteration of Arcane Firearm dis-incentivizes Artillerists from utilizing their other ranged damage dealing options. I am just saying it should be an even playing field between an artillerist focusing on Cantrip/Spell Damage and an artillerist wanting to focus on Crossbows/Firearms with for instance the repeating shot infusion.
The only reason they'll be using cantrips instead of other spells is spell availability. Everything the arcane firearm does for cantrips, it does (often better) for leveled spells.
Artillerist is built to be, basically, the "blaster spellcaster" version of artificer. If "they" had wanted it to be a ranged-weapon artificer (kinda stepping on the battlesmith's toes, there), they would have given artillerist a way to substitute Int for Dex when using ranged weapons.
Welcome to the world of spell casting.
The reality is that their other ranged options aren't necessarily as good as those cantrips. Particularly after getting leveled a bit. Crossbows and Firearms are going to be secondary in damage without a lot of extra rescources to make them better such as feats and the like that the arcane firearm has nothing to do with. The arcane firearm is all about spells and spell casting. This is not a mistake.
Arcane Firearm doesn't do *anything* until your DM fixes it with a houserule, so it's a bit challenging to discuss what it does across different tables. Unless your firearm has a hole in it, casting through it is not a defined thing and means nothing at all. If your firearm is, say, just a stick, you have no mechanism for casting through it and cannot trigger the ability. I am, as always, convinced Tasha's was never playtested.
If you think it's easy predicting how DMs will fix it, consider the radically different wording on Enhanced Arcane Focus (which, like almost every such rule in the game, only requires you to hold it) and Alchemical Savant, which requires you to use the item as your focus. Which of these was actually intended for Artillerist? Perhaps neither, and they really do intend that you carve a hole in your firearm and cast through the hole? Who even knows.
this is actually a bunch of BS. It doesn't need fixing. Your going overly literal to create this false equivalency. Casting through it means using it to focus your magic into and then release it from there at your target. That should be blatantly obvious and I think even your aware of that meaning because of various other foci in the game. And the shere meaning of the word Focus itself.
What?
It must be a wand, rod, or staff (any of which is an arcane focus), and allows you to use said focus for your artificer spells. Casting "through" merely (obviously) means using that focus for the spell.
Obvious for you may not mean obvious for anyone else. You have chosen one of the options I listed (Alchemical Savant, only slightly less bad - Alchemical Savant really doesn't work on cantrips), but why didn't you choose Enhanced Arcane Focus/All-Purpose Tool/every other special focus in the game, which only requires holding the focus? Why didn't you choose a literal interpretation, and you have to drill a hole in your stick?
There's no such thing as casting "through" a focus. That's not how foci work. Like most of Tasha's, this rule was written without any understanding of how the game works, so we're left to guess at what they were trying to say. Ultimately, as a result, we can't really tell people how the rule will work on a table until they talk to their GM, just like trying to cast Charm Person through a glass window.
nah, you're being intentionally obtuse.
From the PHB: "An arcane focus is a special item — an orb, a crystal, a rod, a specially constructed staff, a wand-like length of wood, or some similar item — designed to channel the power of arcane spells." D&D 5e is written in natural language, and does not try to define common english words as technical terms. "Channel" -> "through." Easy and obvious. The entire game falls apart if you ignore the basic meanings of words, and you're just cherry-picking random bits to rag on the book.
Edit: seriously, the best thing you can hope to accomplish with this (other than, I guess, performance art) is to confuse people.
We will have to agree to disagree on the assertion "This is not a mistake." The entire focus of Artificer is magical gadgets and the entire focus of Artillerist is magical ranged attacks. It seems strange to me to decide at level 5 AFTER granting infusions that enhance your mundane weapons to basically say "You know, lets give a bump in damage output for this class, you know since they don't get Extra Attack, BUT let's make sure they can ONLY use it with half of the skill set we have given them...."
Imagine if Paladin was told they could ONLY use their extra attack when they use Divine Smite. That is effectively what Arcane Firearm does....
The wording on Arcane firearm can also apply to (artificer) spells cast from magic items.
Arcane firearm doesn't specify the rod, wand, or staff can't be a magic item, so it can be applied to a wand of fireballs.
Arcane firearm specifies "When you cast an artificer spell through the firearm," for the Artillerist fireball is an artificer spell and casting a spell "from" a magic item is contextually close enough to "through" that it applies as well.
So no, the Artillerist isn't necessarily reliant on cantrips if you don't mind using the charges of a magic item. Provided you get your hands on one.
Arcane firearm essentially lets the artillerist have their cake and eat it too... so long as that cake is an artificer spell with a damage roll. Combined with the Artillerist spell list you can get a lot of mileage out of that extra 1d8. (Alchemical savant on the other hand... is whole can of worms)
Changing Arcane firearm to apply it to a weapon attack is... honestly quite underwhelming? Unless you intend on also giving the Artillerist extra attack that'd at best be just an additional 1d8 on your 1 weapon attack in a turn.
It's just easier to reflavor the arcane firearm as a magic gun that shoots cantrips then to change its (rather excellent) mechanics.
If you want to play an artificer optimized for using magic weapons as your main, go-to attack, play a Battlesmith, not an Artillerist.
You'll get martial weapons, can infuse your favorite one, and use it with Int (your casting stat). You'll also be able to use that weapon as your casting focus, for using those sweet Artificer/Battlesmith spells...
Doesn't seem right to give Artillerist a 1d8 bonus to every attack they ever make (unless, of course, they only make spell attacks).
DS doesn't work with ranged attacks because that would go against the entire theme of the Paladin class being a frontline attacker & defender (heavy armor proficiency, touch based healing abilities, melee based fighting styles, exclusive spells that work on melee weapons only, short range only aura's and aura spells).
Imagine if DS ONLY applied to ranged attacks and it would be a comparable analogy to Arcane Firearm.
I'm not saying change it to ONLY boosting weapon attacks. I am saying for a class that gets limited spell slots and few cantrips but LOTS of options for ranged attack damage, making the big power boost at level 5 only apply to the limited spell slots and few cantrips is a strange class design choice.
I mean I specifically said it should apply to spells or ranged attacks with infusion weapons , not "every attack they ever make," to keep it thematic. I don't feel like that steps on the toes of Battlesmith and Battlesmith doesn't provide the appropriate fantasy in my mind for an eldritch sniper like the artillerist. If Artificer got a more normal progression of cantrips, I probably wouldn't feel strongly about it but since Mending is essentially an Artificer Tax, having 1 attack cantrip to spam when you run out of your limited spell slots to take advantage of your key level 5 feature is very underwhelming until you hit level 10.
Mending is hardly an artificer tax for artillerists...the chances of you needing to heal your cannon between two fights (Mending being essentially non-combat time) inside of the only-1-hour duration is pretty low. It's way way more important for Battlesmith.
Using Arcane Firearm with, say, Firebolt, and possibly Spell Sniper or Elemental Adept or such, is probably the best way to get an "eldritch sniper" concept with Artillerist. Use Fireball for the big guns. Or just thinking of your Eldritch Cannon as a sniper's tool... I think of Battlesmith as (more or less) "ratchet and clank," which definitely includes sniper-rifle-type stuff. An infused ranged weapon, using Int, stacking in an Arcane Jolt, seems like a perfect match for the sniper concept. With a bit of freeform thinking, the Steel Defender could operate like a spotter (the help action, maybe).
(For a proper sniper, neither of those will match a rogue's sneak attack at range from a hidden position, but...)