1. The potions effects themselves don't scale at all, meaning your potions (apart from the temp hp at 9th) are no better than a 20th level artificer. The "okay" effects your exlixir have are borderline useless at higher levels other than for stacking purposes (which is only worth it if someone else, probably the wizard or cleric, casts the spell the elixir is based on). A part from stacking, its debatable if they are even worth the first level spell slot (please don't use higher level spells slots for these, its truly not worth it) until maybe 9th level.
2. It uses up way too many of your spell slots. The other artificer subclasses don't have to constantly expend spell slots to use their features. The Artillerist and Battle Smith only have to expend 1 spell slot (assuming their summon was destroyed) to have a second person on the field, constant damage, and heals (constant temp hp from the Artillerist and a 3 times a 2d8+proficiency bonus hp, which is better than what the healing elixir can do). The Armorer doesn't have ANY features that use it's spell slots, but you'd have to spend your half cast spell slots like a madman to use your main feature.
Given that elixirs are the main draw of the class, and the fact that you can't even use them anywhere near as often as the other subclasses can use their main features, AND the fact that they have such a small effect makes the subclass terrible.
There were multiple comments saying that you can just make things like Alchemist's Fire and Vials of Acid to fulfil the "bomber" part of being an alchemist, but all the other Artificers can do the same thing as well if they choose alchemist's supplies from their starting proficiencies, not to mention you have to wait until 11THLEVEL to be quick about making them (and by that point, they aren't even worth making outside of out of combat stuff).
I completely redid how Experimental Elixirs worked to get rid of these problems. Instead of getting free elixirs at the start of the day and being able to make more with your spell slots, I made it so you can use your bonus action to create elixirs, and you can use the bonus action a number of times equal to double your proficiency bonus and ca no longer use your spell slots to create them. This way, you aren't overly reliant on your spell slots as a half caster to use your main subclass feature. Elixirs you make can be drunk as a bonus action as well so you aren't destroying your action economy. All of the potions scale in some way (except the boldness potion because that one is just fine the way it is) off of your proficiency bonus. The healing potion heals a number of d4's equal to your proficiency bonus + int mod (for example, an 8th level Alchemist's Healing Potion would heal 3d4+5 hp), the swift potion increases your speed by a number of feet equal to 5 times your proficiency bonus, etc. I also gave it offensive/debuff elixir like alchemist's fire, miasma, acid, adhesive etc. whose damage also scales off of your proficiency bonus and the save dc (if any) is based off of your artificer spell save dc. They are considered proficient in throwing their elixirs can use their int mod instead of dex for the attack rolls (so they don't have to invest into both their dex and a feat to be good at throwing them), and can throw them up to 30 feet.
This cements the Alchemists as the versatile buffer/debuffer out of the subclasses and gives it a proper leg to stand on.
The armorer, artillerist, and battle smith all more or less exist alongside their core artificer class features. You can use their gimmicks and also still use your class' spell slots (depending on encounter structure, the artillerist might drift into the same territory as the alchemist though).
The alchemist meanwhile has to choose: either get stuck with one paltry elixir a day and largely forgoing your subclass gimmick, or going all in on your subclass and having very few or almost no spells.
It makes the subclass feel a lot more limited as a result, but also I'm not really convinced that the Alchemist is so much more powerful than the other subclasses as to justify the high cost either.
The alchemist meanwhile has to choose: either get stuck with one paltry elixir a day and largely forgoing your subclass gimmick, or going all in on your subclass and having very few or almost no spells.
Those are not your only two choices; you can also c) spend only one or two slots to get the key elixirs you think you'll need. They all give benefits equivalent to at least a 1st-level spell, except that you can give them to anyone to use, so it's usually worth doing.
And you only get a single random elixir at levels 3 to 5; from 6th you get a second. The third probably comes in too late at 15th (should be 12th or even 9th IMO) but that's a meta problem (many campaigns not lasting long enough to get higher level features).
While the randomness of the free elixirs can mean you don't always get exactly what you want, it's rare that you're going to get something that nobody in your party can use, and you've effectively gained a spell slot since (as I've said) the effects are equivalent to 1st-level spells (or higher, with limitations, in some cases), let's just quickly go over the list again:
Healing: 1st-level cure wounds (actually very slightly better since it's 2d4 not 1d8).
So you effectively know six additional spells for free, you get to pre-cast one or more of these at random after a long rest, and can do the same for others of your choice at any time as an action. If you're trying to do this in combat then you've waited too long; read the situation, try to decide what you might need before you need it.
It always bothers me when a criticism of a sub-class is that it isn't effortless to play when all you do is just rush headfirst into every fight and combat is 99% of your game; that's not really the sub-class' fault.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The alchemist meanwhile has to choose: either get stuck with one paltry elixir a day and largely forgoing your subclass gimmick, or going all in on your subclass and having very few or almost no spells.
Those are not your only two choices; you can also c) spend only one or two slots to get the key elixirs you think you'll need. They all give benefits equivalent to at least a 1st-level spell, except that you can give them to anyone to use, so it's usually worth doing.
Spending your very limited spell slots.
And you only get a single random elixir at levels 3 to 5; from 6th you get a second. The third probably comes in too late at 15th (should be 12th or even 9th IMO) but that's a meta problem (many campaigns not lasting long enough to get higher level features).
Somewhat agree, you should definitely get more elixirs, but they should not be random and they should scale. A few temp HP for one character is not scaling.
While the randomness of the free elixirs can mean you don't always get exactly what you want, it's rare that you're going to get something that nobody in your party can use, and you've effectively gained a spell slot since (as I've said) the effects are equivalent to 1st-level spells (or higher, with limitations, in some cases), let's just quickly go over the list again:
Here is where you're wrong. Getting some random effect is not like a free spell slot. 82% of the time tier 1 (67% tier 2), if you want a specific elixir, its going to cost you a spell slot. Its even worse if you spend anything besides a first level spell slot on an effect that is basically a 1st level effect. Four of the six are first level spells and the other two while higher level have sever limitations that bring them down to 1st level.
Healing: 1st-level cure wounds (actually very slightly better since it's 2d4 not 1d8).
So you effectively know six additional spells for free, you get to pre-cast one or more of these at random after a long rest, and can do the same for others of your choice at any time as an action. If you're trying to do this in combat then you've waited too long; read the situation, try to decide what you might need before you need it.
The foreknowledge isn't always available, and generally unless the DM has really broadcast what you're challenge is, the randomness renders it almost completely worthless anyway. Again, forcing you to spend that first level spell slot for a first level effect.
It always bothers me when a criticism of a sub-class is that it isn't effortless to play when all you do is just rush headfirst into every fight and combat is 99% of your game; that's not really the sub-class' fault.
That's the thing, I've played an alchemist and I've DMed for both battle smiths (Frost maiden 1- 13 & AL modules) and artillerist (numerous AL modules) . The reason I haven't DMed for an alchemist is people look at it, compare it to the other three sub-classes and all come to the same conclusion, 'the alchemist subclass is worse across the board than all three of the others'. I've only had one session with an armorer in the group, still much better than an alchemist.
All these anti-alchemist sentiments must be purely from a DPS front line perspective. I am a utility/support player and have DM'ed for a player whom usually plays healers but wanted a break from cleric and in both cases, they alchemists are consistently the MVPs for their support and utility. Don't get me wrong, dealing the most (or at least equal) damage every turn is great but handing off my SSI to my tiny servant or homunculus, next casting Sanctuary on myself and then the help action for the melees with SSI Cure Wounds for 2d8+10 for the remaining 9 turns is just so satisfying.
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired) Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
I mean to be fair, the Artillerist's cannon that also requires you to use spell slots after an hour is a LOT stronger than the level 1 slots you're using to recharge it for the most part, and you get to use it for a long time instead of needing a spell slot for every single use.
That feels more like an argument that the Artillerist shouldn't be able to spend a spell slot to trivially bring the turret(s) back, especially since a Battle Smith's Steel Defender can only be brought back on a long rest. It makes being an inventor trivial for one.
The actual comparison though is somewhat tricky; the cannons are either vulnerable on their own (and much slower than the Artillerist, which makes the flamethrower harder to use in proper battle areas) or will be taking damage some of the time that you do if you're carrying them. They also mean you effectively don't have a bonus action if you want to use them (same as a Battle Smith's Steel Defender). The protector turret is both a blessing and a curse, as it forces you and your allies within 10 feet of it, meaning you're more vulnerable to areas of effect and/or focused attacks (multiple enemies on a priority target).
Elixirs take an action, but not necessarily the Alchemist's action, and they should be used before or after a combat, rather than during; once you're in combat the ones that have duration are simply active, meaning those that have them have their full action economy available while receiving the effect. There's also again the issue of utility; turrets are only useful in combat, they're not going to help you disguise yourself to bypass a fight entirely, or fly over an obstacle etc.
I'm not saying the alchemist isn't weaker overall in its ways, but I think people massively exaggerate the difference.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
It would only be an argument like that if there were people complaining about the turret being too strong but I've rarely ever seen that being the case (maybe once or twice for the tempHP one until Twilight Cleric arrived).
The issue I was referring to is whether it should be possible to simply bring it back using a spell slot like creating them is meaningless; again, a Battle Smith's Steel Defender can't be brought back so easily, so why is an Artillerist's turret so trivial to fix when broken? It's already good as a once per long rest feature.
Update: Ignore this, I always forget about the 1 hour duration.
The speed doesn't matter much as it's not a melee combatant and you can just carry it around anyway.
The speed matters if you're arguing that the flamethrower is as good as burning hands, as a 15 foot move and a 15 foot cone is a maximum reach of 30 feet, which means isn't much if you're fighting across a large castle courtyard or whatever. Yes, you can carry it, but then it gets hit by every area effect that you do, and if you don't carry it then strictly speaking it slows down your entire party, though I expect most DMs will generously ignore that. While these aren't major drawbacks, sticking to the rules they do matter.
I'm not really arguing about the cannon being better utility wise or not though. The point was that saying the elixirs are about as good as 1st level spells is not a great argument when considering that the other subclass features are worth a lot more than a 1st level slot. Using that as argument only highlights how the feature is a step behind the rest and could do well with some love.
The thing is they're not just as good as 1st level spells; people think about the feature in the wrong terms.
What people don't appreciate about Alchemist, same as with Monk, is that versatility has value. While Artillerist, Armorer and Battle Smith all do one thing very well, that's pretty much all they do; Armorer is the exception in that Infiltrator armour can be used for stealth and such, but it's not a huge range.
The way to think about Alchemist's features are in terms of having more spells and spell slots than any other Artificer; Experimental Elixir effectively gives you six more spells known than any other sub-class, plus one additional 1st-level spell slot. Restorative Agents gives you an additional 2nd level spell known, and essentially up to four or five 2nd level spell slots to cast it with. Chemical Mastery gives you an additional 5th-level spell known, and a 6th-level spell, and a free spell slot to cast each of them with.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I honestly disagree on your first point a lot. If I couldn't reactive it by using a spell slot I probably wouldn't ever play an Artillerist. It already annoys me enough that I have to constantly reactivate it in the first place as is.
Sorry, I keep forgetting about the 1 hour duration compared to a Battle Smith Steel Defender (which lasts indefinitely). In that case the recovering via spell slots is fine.
The speed problem is pretty situational at best. Nothing stops you from picking it up and dropping it as you go if you actually have to relocate this much and it getting hit by every AoE that hits you is purely homebrew as well.
How is it homebrew? If it's in your space and you get hit by an area of effect, that that area of effect hits the turret(s) as well, that's just how AoE's work.
If the way to think about the Alchemist is in terms of having more spells and spell slots and that's all there's to it ... then I question why not just play a Wizard in the first place.
Same reason someone goes a Paladin instead of a Fighter or Cleric, or a Ranger instead of a Fighter or Druid and so-on; you go a half caster because either the same mixture of benefits you'd aim for in a multiclass anyway but with fewer of the drawbacks, or you get something unique to the half caster class. In the Artificer's case that'd be infusions, more magic items, their different spell list (which includes healing, unlike the Wizard) and so-on.
For the Alchemist specifically it's more like a two-thirds (rounded down) caster, while retaining all of the core benefits of being an Artificer. You get all of the support abilities you're likely to need for free as standard, leaving you free to pick whatever else you want from your normal Artificer picks which, though they could be improved (needs some more acid/fire/necrotic/poison options) is more varied than other half casters and some full casters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Just because it's in the same spot it doesn't mean it gets automatically hit though? Usually an AoE involves some kind of saving throw at least.
Pretty much every AoE in the game inflicts damage regardless of whether you save or not, and the turrets don't have Evasion; the only exceptions are AoE cantrips and a handful of specific monster abilities, and even against those the turret has poor saves. But in general if you're in the area, you're hit.
I wasn't expecting to be fought on what is a very basic game mechanic, especially since it's increasingly off-topic. Point was that the turrets have their own limitations; if you carry them you're focusing for AoEs (same as the Protector), and if you don't they're slow. None of this should be controversial.
Basically it's not quite as simple as "I spend a spell slot and get a free hour of damage" as it can appear, plus they're only useful in combat. We're pretty well covered for combat Artificers that deal damage, the Alchemist gives us one with more versatility both in and out of it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
But not the healing they can't. That scenario I put up was but one thing, the healing my Alchemist puts out, aaaaaall the free lesser restorations and yes, even the experimental elixirs, are something the party can't do without out anymore. And these are still among other things I can get my modest little plaguey-boy to do. I think many of the voices on this thread are coming from a very bias, "I like doing damage", high standpoint.
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired) Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
It always bothers me when a criticism of a sub-class is that it isn't effortless to play when all you do is just rush headfirst into every fight and combat is 99% of your game; that's not really the sub-class' fault.
Me too, so I'm very thankful that no one has made that argument here.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Experimental Elixir is bad for two main reasons:
1. The potions effects themselves don't scale at all, meaning your potions (apart from the temp hp at 9th) are no better than a 20th level artificer. The "okay" effects your exlixir have are borderline useless at higher levels other than for stacking purposes (which is only worth it if someone else, probably the wizard or cleric, casts the spell the elixir is based on). A part from stacking, its debatable if they are even worth the first level spell slot (please don't use higher level spells slots for these, its truly not worth it) until maybe 9th level.
2. It uses up way too many of your spell slots. The other artificer subclasses don't have to constantly expend spell slots to use their features. The Artillerist and Battle Smith only have to expend 1 spell slot (assuming their summon was destroyed) to have a second person on the field, constant damage, and heals (constant temp hp from the Artillerist and a 3 times a 2d8+proficiency bonus hp, which is better than what the healing elixir can do). The Armorer doesn't have ANY features that use it's spell slots, but you'd have to spend your half cast spell slots like a madman to use your main feature.
Given that elixirs are the main draw of the class, and the fact that you can't even use them anywhere near as often as the other subclasses can use their main features, AND the fact that they have such a small effect makes the subclass terrible.
There were multiple comments saying that you can just make things like Alchemist's Fire and Vials of Acid to fulfil the "bomber" part of being an alchemist, but all the other Artificers can do the same thing as well if they choose alchemist's supplies from their starting proficiencies, not to mention you have to wait until 11TH LEVEL to be quick about making them (and by that point, they aren't even worth making outside of out of combat stuff).
I completely redid how Experimental Elixirs worked to get rid of these problems. Instead of getting free elixirs at the start of the day and being able to make more with your spell slots, I made it so you can use your bonus action to create elixirs, and you can use the bonus action a number of times equal to double your proficiency bonus and ca no longer use your spell slots to create them. This way, you aren't overly reliant on your spell slots as a half caster to use your main subclass feature. Elixirs you make can be drunk as a bonus action as well so you aren't destroying your action economy. All of the potions scale in some way (except the boldness potion because that one is just fine the way it is) off of your proficiency bonus. The healing potion heals a number of d4's equal to your proficiency bonus + int mod (for example, an 8th level Alchemist's Healing Potion would heal 3d4+5 hp), the swift potion increases your speed by a number of feet equal to 5 times your proficiency bonus, etc. I also gave it offensive/debuff elixir like alchemist's fire, miasma, acid, adhesive etc. whose damage also scales off of your proficiency bonus and the save dc (if any) is based off of your artificer spell save dc. They are considered proficient in throwing their elixirs can use their int mod instead of dex for the attack rolls (so they don't have to invest into both their dex and a feat to be good at throwing them), and can throw them up to 30 feet.
This cements the Alchemists as the versatile buffer/debuffer out of the subclasses and gives it a proper leg to stand on.
2 is the biggest problem for the Alchemist, imo.
The armorer, artillerist, and battle smith all more or less exist alongside their core artificer class features. You can use their gimmicks and also still use your class' spell slots (depending on encounter structure, the artillerist might drift into the same territory as the alchemist though).
The alchemist meanwhile has to choose: either get stuck with one paltry elixir a day and largely forgoing your subclass gimmick, or going all in on your subclass and having very few or almost no spells.
It makes the subclass feel a lot more limited as a result, but also I'm not really convinced that the Alchemist is so much more powerful than the other subclasses as to justify the high cost either.
Those are not your only two choices; you can also c) spend only one or two slots to get the key elixirs you think you'll need. They all give benefits equivalent to at least a 1st-level spell, except that you can give them to anyone to use, so it's usually worth doing.
And you only get a single random elixir at levels 3 to 5; from 6th you get a second. The third probably comes in too late at 15th (should be 12th or even 9th IMO) but that's a meta problem (many campaigns not lasting long enough to get higher level features).
While the randomness of the free elixirs can mean you don't always get exactly what you want, it's rare that you're going to get something that nobody in your party can use, and you've effectively gained a spell slot since (as I've said) the effects are equivalent to 1st-level spells (or higher, with limitations, in some cases), let's just quickly go over the list again:
So you effectively know six additional spells for free, you get to pre-cast one or more of these at random after a long rest, and can do the same for others of your choice at any time as an action. If you're trying to do this in combat then you've waited too long; read the situation, try to decide what you might need before you need it.
It always bothers me when a criticism of a sub-class is that it isn't effortless to play when all you do is just rush headfirst into every fight and combat is 99% of your game; that's not really the sub-class' fault.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Spending your very limited spell slots.
Somewhat agree, you should definitely get more elixirs, but they should not be random and they should scale. A few temp HP for one character is not scaling.
Here is where you're wrong. Getting some random effect is not like a free spell slot. 82% of the time tier 1 (67% tier 2), if you want a specific elixir, its going to cost you a spell slot. Its even worse if you spend anything besides a first level spell slot on an effect that is basically a 1st level effect. Four of the six are first level spells and the other two while higher level have sever limitations that bring them down to 1st level.
The foreknowledge isn't always available, and generally unless the DM has really broadcast what you're challenge is, the randomness renders it almost completely worthless anyway. Again, forcing you to spend that first level spell slot for a first level effect.
That's the thing, I've played an alchemist and I've DMed for both battle smiths (Frost maiden 1- 13 & AL modules) and artillerist (numerous AL modules) . The reason I haven't DMed for an alchemist is people look at it, compare it to the other three sub-classes and all come to the same conclusion, 'the alchemist subclass is worse across the board than all three of the others'. I've only had one session with an armorer in the group, still much better than an alchemist.
All these anti-alchemist sentiments must be purely from a DPS front line perspective. I am a utility/support player and have DM'ed for a player whom usually plays healers but wanted a break from cleric and in both cases, they alchemists are consistently the MVPs for their support and utility. Don't get me wrong, dealing the most (or at least equal) damage every turn is great but handing off my SSI to my tiny servant or homunculus, next casting Sanctuary on myself and then the help action for the melees with SSI Cure Wounds for 2d8+10 for the remaining 9 turns is just so satisfying.
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired)
Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer
Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden
DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
That feels more like an argument that the Artillerist shouldn't be able to spend a spell slot to trivially bring the turret(s) back, especially since a Battle Smith's Steel Defender can only be brought back on a long rest. It makes being an inventor trivial for one.
The actual comparison though is somewhat tricky; the cannons are either vulnerable on their own (and much slower than the Artillerist, which makes the flamethrower harder to use in proper battle areas) or will be taking damage some of the time that you do if you're carrying them. They also mean you effectively don't have a bonus action if you want to use them (same as a Battle Smith's Steel Defender). The protector turret is both a blessing and a curse, as it forces you and your allies within 10 feet of it, meaning you're more vulnerable to areas of effect and/or focused attacks (multiple enemies on a priority target).
Elixirs take an action, but not necessarily the Alchemist's action, and they should be used before or after a combat, rather than during; once you're in combat the ones that have duration are simply active, meaning those that have them have their full action economy available while receiving the effect. There's also again the issue of utility; turrets are only useful in combat, they're not going to help you disguise yourself to bypass a fight entirely, or fly over an obstacle etc.
I'm not saying the alchemist isn't weaker overall in its ways, but I think people massively exaggerate the difference.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The issue I was referring to is whether it should be possible to simply bring it back using a spell slot like creating them is meaningless; again, a Battle Smith's Steel Defender can't be brought back so easily, so why is an Artillerist's turret so trivial to fix when broken? It's already good as a once per long rest feature.Update: Ignore this, I always forget about the 1 hour duration.
The speed matters if you're arguing that the flamethrower is as good as burning hands, as a 15 foot move and a 15 foot cone is a maximum reach of 30 feet, which means isn't much if you're fighting across a large castle courtyard or whatever. Yes, you can carry it, but then it gets hit by every area effect that you do, and if you don't carry it then strictly speaking it slows down your entire party, though I expect most DMs will generously ignore that. While these aren't major drawbacks, sticking to the rules they do matter.
The thing is they're not just as good as 1st level spells; people think about the feature in the wrong terms.
What people don't appreciate about Alchemist, same as with Monk, is that versatility has value. While Artillerist, Armorer and Battle Smith all do one thing very well, that's pretty much all they do; Armorer is the exception in that Infiltrator armour can be used for stealth and such, but it's not a huge range.
The way to think about Alchemist's features are in terms of having more spells and spell slots than any other Artificer; Experimental Elixir effectively gives you six more spells known than any other sub-class, plus one additional 1st-level spell slot. Restorative Agents gives you an additional 2nd level spell known, and essentially up to four or five 2nd level spell slots to cast it with. Chemical Mastery gives you an additional 5th-level spell known, and a 6th-level spell, and a free spell slot to cast each of them with.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Sorry, I keep forgetting about the 1 hour duration compared to a Battle Smith Steel Defender (which lasts indefinitely). In that case the recovering via spell slots is fine.
How is it homebrew? If it's in your space and you get hit by an area of effect, that that area of effect hits the turret(s) as well, that's just how AoE's work.
Same reason someone goes a Paladin instead of a Fighter or Cleric, or a Ranger instead of a Fighter or Druid and so-on; you go a half caster because either the same mixture of benefits you'd aim for in a multiclass anyway but with fewer of the drawbacks, or you get something unique to the half caster class. In the Artificer's case that'd be infusions, more magic items, their different spell list (which includes healing, unlike the Wizard) and so-on.
For the Alchemist specifically it's more like a two-thirds (rounded down) caster, while retaining all of the core benefits of being an Artificer. You get all of the support abilities you're likely to need for free as standard, leaving you free to pick whatever else you want from your normal Artificer picks which, though they could be improved (needs some more acid/fire/necrotic/poison options) is more varied than other half casters and some full casters.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Eldritch Cannons can make saves...
Pretty much every AoE in the game inflicts damage regardless of whether you save or not, and the turrets don't have Evasion; the only exceptions are AoE cantrips and a handful of specific monster abilities, and even against those the turret has poor saves. But in general if you're in the area, you're hit.
I wasn't expecting to be fought on what is a very basic game mechanic, especially since it's increasingly off-topic. Point was that the turrets have their own limitations; if you carry them you're focusing for AoEs (same as the Protector), and if you don't they're slow. None of this should be controversial.
Basically it's not quite as simple as "I spend a spell slot and get a free hour of damage" as it can appear, plus they're only useful in combat. We're pretty well covered for combat Artificers that deal damage, the Alchemist gives us one with more versatility both in and out of it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Ah, I think I misread your earlier post as implying that Cannons couldn't be targeted, via being objects.
But not the healing they can't. That scenario I put up was but one thing, the healing my Alchemist puts out, aaaaaall the free lesser restorations and yes, even the experimental elixirs, are something the party can't do without out anymore. And these are still among other things I can get my modest little plaguey-boy to do. I think many of the voices on this thread are coming from a very bias, "I like doing damage", high standpoint.
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired)
Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer
Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden
DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
Me too, so I'm very thankful that no one has made that argument here.