I love the idea of an elemental weapon infusion. It would be really easy to balance too since all you have to do is limit the number and/or length of times it can activate like the radiant weapon infusion. For example, it could have three charges, and you can spend one charge to activate the elemental damage for one minute.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Bark side up, bark side down, it really, truly does not matter.
Yes. I'm literally talking about it being an infusion. Just a somewhat generic one. I also didn't have this idea all that well fleshed out when I first posted it so I apologize if my description of it has been inconsistent.
Sooo, how is "making spells permanent through infused items" any different from "expand the list of available infusions"? You're just saying the same thing in two slightly different ways. I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say.
Hopefully this clears that up:
What I was envisioning was a single infusion named something like "Permanent Spell" which allows the Artificer to select a spell on the Artificer list to gain the effects of that spell as if it had an unlimited duration. Rather than a list of specific spells that are allowed I was thinking it'd have some rules for which spells were allowable like maybe "spells with a duration longer than instantaneous that target a single creature or object" rather than having a literal list of allowed spells appearing on a page. I wasn't trying to invent some grand new mechanic.
Effectively it would expand the list of infused items. So it's not functionally different from adding a whole bunch of specifically named and described infusions but it'd take up less space on a page to describe and I find that more elegant (not that that especially matters).
Talking with the DM to maybe homebrew options is always a possibility for every class, quest, scenario, etc in D&D (so long as a DM is willing). It's so ubiquitous a possibility that I generally tend to not even bother bringing it up when talking about hypothetical additions to a class's features. But that's a very specific solution for a single group/session/etc and I'm talking generalities of things that I think would be cool to be added to the Artificer. Is any of it necessary? No. I just think it'd be neat.
There was a spell in 3.5 (never played it myself) literally named Permanency and when thinking about what spells might be unique to the Artificer it felt like the kind of thing that might fit well within the infusion mechanic hence why I started talking about "permanent spells". I brought up Elemental weapon as an example because I thought it would help illustrate my point but now I'm thinking it didn't help at all, sorry.
Anyway I really wasn't expecting to veer that far off topic or this in depth about this one off idea I had so if it's still unclear I think I'm done discussing it regardless.
I just wish that WotC had give the Artificer a couple unique to Artificer spells, like every other 1/2 caster got . . .
What kind of spells would you expect?
I'm not sure Artificers desperately need unique spells; Paladins hardly use theirs anyway, as they basically do similar things to Divine Smite, meanwhile the unique spells for Rangers are arguably one of their key features. Artificers' already have infusions so I'm not sure how much they need?
I think any unique spells would probably be utility/repair oriented, as you'd need to justify why a spell should be only for artificers? Maybe a superior full spell version of Mending (repairs more or repairs multiple)?
How about a Create Construct spell, like a lesser version of Animate Objects, so they can have a construct servant without being a Battle Smith or taking the homunculus. Sure, you could say Tiny Servant fills this role, but this would be stronger and concentration, similar to the Conjure Whatever Spirit spells from that Spells and Tattoos UA.
Or, that level one spell artificers got in the UA, whatever than magical weapon spell was. That should have been published and been artificer specific.
They could have a spell that lets them create one of their infusions, but only lasts a minute or hour and it takes concentration. It could be called Temporary Infusion, or something like that.
What about a spell that lets them heal constructs, but harms non-constructs with Force damage (like Negative Energy Flood for constructs).
I could go on. There are many possible artificer unique spells, and they should have some. Every other caster in the game (even sorcerers with their one unique spell) have unique spells that no one else gets access to(not counting added spells from subclasses). There's no reason that Artificers shouldn't get unique spells. Sure, Paladins barely use their spells, but they are good spells and are only not used because Divine Smite is better than most of them. Ranger spells are super useful, but Hunter's Mark is the most commonly used one because the others also take concentration (CFV will hopefully fix this). Every caster should get unique spells.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Ruleswise? Probably because it would be too powerful. But again, just talk to your DM.
It would not be if they designed it correctly. It would probably be one of the infused items that was a +1 weapon, but also did an extra 1d4 of an elemental damage you choose when you make the infused weapon. That would not be overpowered, just like Returning Weapon, Radiant Weapon, and Repeating Weapon aren't OP.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I think Artificers are mostly balanced, and they're my favorite class in this edition of D&D, but they are not without their problems. They should have unique spells (hopefully coming out in Tasha's), Alchemists need fixing, they should get a few spells that were not put on their spell list for seemingly no reason (find traps, dragon's breath, etc), there should be more infusion options, artificer specific magic items (hopefully coming out in Tasha's), and a bit more that could be fixed/tweaked.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Out of combat I think the Artificer is an RP powerhouse (mine definitely is!) but in combat they're weak. Let's compare with other classes at the D8 hit die level:
Cleric: Can access heavy armour and martial weapons from L1 (some subclasses), can make weapons magical (some subclasses), is a full caster.
Bard: Starts with one more skill proficiency and just as many tool proficiencies (albeit instruments) as the Artificer. Starts with access to a small suite of martial weapons from L1 and is a full caster.
Rogue: Has more skill proficiencies than the Artificer. Can pick locks and disarm traps (the main things your Artificer actually does on a dungeon crawl). Has access to a small suite of martial weapons from L1. Has Sneak Attack from L1 and Cunning Action from L2 which allow them to punch well above their weight in combat. They get expertise on two skills at L1 (which can include combat-adjacent skills such as Stealth, Perception, Intimidation) whilst the Artificer gets expertise on tool proficiencies at L6.
Monk: freaking monks.
The Artificer is a half-caster, so let us now consider the other half-caster classes:
Paladin: d10 hit die, all weapons and armour, fighting style, uses Lay On Hands without using a spell slot.
Ranger: this notoriously maligned class has a d10 hit die, access to martial weapons and medium armour from L1, fighting style, and of course the stuff that goes with their survival specialty.
Now back to the Artificer: the Artificer can craft a limited number of magic items from a limited selection, thus saving the party money on stuff that they would otherwise have to buy. The Artificer can only make a small handful of these before the earlier stuff stops working. The Artificer can build and use guns, but if that's all you're after from this class then the Gunslinger has you covered. I should note here that the Artificer has two things that the other half-casters don't: spellcasting from L1 instead of L2 (big woop), and cantrips (actually really good).
Still for having a d8 hit die, half casting, medium armour, simple weapons, and no useful in-combat talents that can't be obtained by just pouring ASIs into DEX, what you get is a character with a ton of flavour, a whole two cantrips for the large part of most games, and who saves you one extra trip to Pumat Sol. Not counting subclass stuff.
So what should be done? (My own view, you will likely disagree)
The Mending cantrip should come on top of the two starting cantrips as standard. A magical smith should just have that, no questions asked.
The Artificer needs at least as many skill proficiencies as the Bard, if not the Rogue. This is a character who works with their very deft hands on arcane devices all day long, they function in that skilled space.
Tool expertise should come in for two tools - a nominated "tool of the trade" (Alchemist's Tools for a prospective Alchemist, Smith's Tools for all others) plus either Tinker's Tools or Thieves' Tools - at L1. The broader remit of Tool Expertise should kick in at L6 as per.
You just listet for each class what they have that the artificer doesn't, that is like pointing out that a duck can't dive as deep as a fish and can't fly as fast as a hawk and run as fast as a Lion. Still ducks can fly better than lions. The artificer is a duck, he can do a lot of things. Funnily enough I still think the things you'd change would be reasonable.
I've been playing an Artificer for a while and they definitely are weaker in combat, but with Guidance and Flash of Genius I almost made a DC 20 check on a natural 1. The class definitely has some issues but outside of combat they are power houses at skill checks, and can give the party access to some amazing gear at low levels (+1 weapon at level 2, Bag of Holding, maybe an Alchemy Jug. At level 6 they can make a Cloak of Elvenkind, a ridiculously strong item). I'd say the class doesn't scale the best compared to others, but still making +2 armor at level 10 is really strong and Boots of Flying are just silly.
The main problem with the Artificer is that your big thing takes place outside of combat so when you get to combat you end up relying on your limited spell slots, and offensively you only really have cantrips, which are so limited for you that you won't feel cool using gadgets and stuff and it becomes, Firebolt again I guess. Still it's a really cool class and when not in combat feels really good to play.
Reminder that you don't have to give the infusions you have away - they are your main class feature, not gear for the other players - you can give it away sometimes , but keep that mainly for yourself. The combat options of the Artificer depend a lot on the subclass I think. I play an battle smith with a heavy crossbow(+repeating shot) and she hits hard. I don't even have an offensive cantrip and the only combat spells I regularly use are Shield and Cure Wounds.
The Artificer isn't a pure caster so he won't hold up in combat if you only trust in that.
I been playing an artillerist artificer, and I can say the damage can be swingy on him. The Eldritch cannon is very powerful early on, and at level 6 gets pretty powerful with 3d8. Main attack is fire bolt though, and if you don’t have the elemental adept feat then damage will definitely drop off. I almost argue it is more important than getting a 20 in intelligence just so your main damage doesn’t get reduced by resistance.
i can say that the arcane firearm is pretty fun to have as well. 2d10 + 1d8 Fire damage per round can be amazing, and you can consistently hit with that if you have your enhanced arcane focus active and on your person.
also it’s worthy to note just how versatile you can be. The Protector Eldritch cannon can provide persistent protection with temp HP, you can take Blur, which allows you to be a lot harder to hit and spam shield for when you are hit. On offense the artillerist can toss out spells like shatter and thunder wave for some nice AOE, and combined with the flame thrower you have AOE attacks without a problem on a single turn. Or, you can go with the Eldritch cannon and Firebolt spell like I usually do, and take two pretty strong shots at enemies every turn.
I can see why they say they may be a little less damaging than other classes, but I still think this class is pretty good.
Well I'm actually about to swap my subclass from alchemist and was thinking of going Artillerist so I'm really happy to hear your opinions about the other ones. I did consider going Battlesmith with a crossbow build, but I tend to prefer being more of a caster, though robot is so cool. Makes it tough to decide.
Well I'm actually about to swap my subclass from alchemist and was thinking of going Artillerist so I'm really happy to hear your opinions about the other ones. I did consider going Battlesmith with a crossbow build, but I tend to prefer being more of a caster, though robot is so cool. Makes it tough to decide.
I basically play a gunslinger Artificer by having the cannon be tiny to hold it, but your turret is basically a robot too. I don’t usually play it without holding the cannon, but the things you can do is pretty fun with it. I’m going to be trying a scuttling flamethrower turret next time I play, but since you can determine how it looks then I think you can go crazy there too.
The strength of an artificer lies very much on which magic items they have. It is, after all, what the class is known for. If you know what you want your artificer to do, you can get the right items and be fairly powerful, or at least useful. The All-Purpose Tool gives a +1 (or +2 or +3, depending on rarity) to all spell attacks and spell save DCs, while practically giving you proficiency with every tool set in the game. In addition to this, you get to have one new cantrip every day (for 8 hours, not sure why they added that particular stipulation but it doesn't make much difference in practice), from ANY spell list. So if you are familiar with magic items, or are willing to be creative with your DM to make your own custom items, I think the artificer is fairly balanced.
(plus, they can craft items not only for themselves but given enough downtime, the whole party can be fitted with nice items that they otherwise wouldn't have had. Yeah the artificer may not be a tank in battle, and they require more *creativity* to be useful than other classes do, but they can be a beast of a supporting character in my opinion)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I love the idea of an elemental weapon infusion. It would be really easy to balance too since all you have to do is limit the number and/or length of times it can activate like the radiant weapon infusion. For example, it could have three charges, and you can spend one charge to activate the elemental damage for one minute.
Bark side up, bark side down, it really, truly does not matter.
Yes. I'm literally talking about it being an infusion. Just a somewhat generic one. I also didn't have this idea all that well fleshed out when I first posted it so I apologize if my description of it has been inconsistent.
Hopefully this clears that up:
What I was envisioning was a single infusion named something like "Permanent Spell" which allows the Artificer to select a spell on the Artificer list to gain the effects of that spell as if it had an unlimited duration. Rather than a list of specific spells that are allowed I was thinking it'd have some rules for which spells were allowable like maybe "spells with a duration longer than instantaneous that target a single creature or object" rather than having a literal list of allowed spells appearing on a page. I wasn't trying to invent some grand new mechanic.
Effectively it would expand the list of infused items. So it's not functionally different from adding a whole bunch of specifically named and described infusions but it'd take up less space on a page to describe and I find that more elegant (not that that especially matters).
Talking with the DM to maybe homebrew options is always a possibility for every class, quest, scenario, etc in D&D (so long as a DM is willing). It's so ubiquitous a possibility that I generally tend to not even bother bringing it up when talking about hypothetical additions to a class's features. But that's a very specific solution for a single group/session/etc and I'm talking generalities of things that I think would be cool to be added to the Artificer. Is any of it necessary? No. I just think it'd be neat.
There was a spell in 3.5 (never played it myself) literally named Permanency and when thinking about what spells might be unique to the Artificer it felt like the kind of thing that might fit well within the infusion mechanic hence why I started talking about "permanent spells". I brought up Elemental weapon as an example because I thought it would help illustrate my point but now I'm thinking it didn't help at all, sorry.
Anyway I really wasn't expecting to veer that far off topic or this in depth about this one off idea I had so if it's still unclear I think I'm done discussing it regardless.
How about a Create Construct spell, like a lesser version of Animate Objects, so they can have a construct servant without being a Battle Smith or taking the homunculus. Sure, you could say Tiny Servant fills this role, but this would be stronger and concentration, similar to the Conjure Whatever Spirit spells from that Spells and Tattoos UA.
Or, that level one spell artificers got in the UA, whatever than magical weapon spell was. That should have been published and been artificer specific.
They could have a spell that lets them create one of their infusions, but only lasts a minute or hour and it takes concentration. It could be called Temporary Infusion, or something like that.
What about a spell that lets them heal constructs, but harms non-constructs with Force damage (like Negative Energy Flood for constructs).
I could go on. There are many possible artificer unique spells, and they should have some. Every other caster in the game (even sorcerers with their one unique spell) have unique spells that no one else gets access to(not counting added spells from subclasses). There's no reason that Artificers shouldn't get unique spells. Sure, Paladins barely use their spells, but they are good spells and are only not used because Divine Smite is better than most of them. Ranger spells are super useful, but Hunter's Mark is the most commonly used one because the others also take concentration (CFV will hopefully fix this). Every caster should get unique spells.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
You mean every other caster class. I agree with this, though.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
It would not be if they designed it correctly. It would probably be one of the infused items that was a +1 weapon, but also did an extra 1d4 of an elemental damage you choose when you make the infused weapon. That would not be overpowered, just like Returning Weapon, Radiant Weapon, and Repeating Weapon aren't OP.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I think Artificers are mostly balanced, and they're my favorite class in this edition of D&D, but they are not without their problems. They should have unique spells (hopefully coming out in Tasha's), Alchemists need fixing, they should get a few spells that were not put on their spell list for seemingly no reason (find traps, dragon's breath, etc), there should be more infusion options, artificer specific magic items (hopefully coming out in Tasha's), and a bit more that could be fixed/tweaked.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Out of combat I think the Artificer is an RP powerhouse (mine definitely is!) but in combat they're weak. Let's compare with other classes at the D8 hit die level:
Cleric: Can access heavy armour and martial weapons from L1 (some subclasses), can make weapons magical (some subclasses), is a full caster.
Bard: Starts with one more skill proficiency and just as many tool proficiencies (albeit instruments) as the Artificer. Starts with access to a small suite of martial weapons from L1 and is a full caster.
Rogue: Has more skill proficiencies than the Artificer. Can pick locks and disarm traps (the main things your Artificer actually does on a dungeon crawl). Has access to a small suite of martial weapons from L1. Has Sneak Attack from L1 and Cunning Action from L2 which allow them to punch well above their weight in combat. They get expertise on two skills at L1 (which can include combat-adjacent skills such as Stealth, Perception, Intimidation) whilst the Artificer gets expertise on tool proficiencies at L6.
Monk: freaking monks.
The Artificer is a half-caster, so let us now consider the other half-caster classes:
Paladin: d10 hit die, all weapons and armour, fighting style, uses Lay On Hands without using a spell slot.
Ranger: this notoriously maligned class has a d10 hit die, access to martial weapons and medium armour from L1, fighting style, and of course the stuff that goes with their survival specialty.
Now back to the Artificer: the Artificer can craft a limited number of magic items from a limited selection, thus saving the party money on stuff that they would otherwise have to buy. The Artificer can only make a small handful of these before the earlier stuff stops working. The Artificer can build and use guns, but if that's all you're after from this class then the Gunslinger has you covered. I should note here that the Artificer has two things that the other half-casters don't: spellcasting from L1 instead of L2 (big woop), and cantrips (actually really good).
Still for having a d8 hit die, half casting, medium armour, simple weapons, and no useful in-combat talents that can't be obtained by just pouring ASIs into DEX, what you get is a character with a ton of flavour, a whole two cantrips for the large part of most games, and who saves you one extra trip to Pumat Sol. Not counting subclass stuff.
So what should be done? (My own view, you will likely disagree)
You just listet for each class what they have that the artificer doesn't, that is like pointing out that a duck can't dive as deep as a fish and can't fly as fast as a hawk and run as fast as a Lion. Still ducks can fly better than lions. The artificer is a duck, he can do a lot of things. Funnily enough I still think the things you'd change would be reasonable.
I've been playing an Artificer for a while and they definitely are weaker in combat, but with Guidance and Flash of Genius I almost made a DC 20 check on a natural 1. The class definitely has some issues but outside of combat they are power houses at skill checks, and can give the party access to some amazing gear at low levels (+1 weapon at level 2, Bag of Holding, maybe an Alchemy Jug. At level 6 they can make a Cloak of Elvenkind, a ridiculously strong item). I'd say the class doesn't scale the best compared to others, but still making +2 armor at level 10 is really strong and Boots of Flying are just silly.
The main problem with the Artificer is that your big thing takes place outside of combat so when you get to combat you end up relying on your limited spell slots, and offensively you only really have cantrips, which are so limited for you that you won't feel cool using gadgets and stuff and it becomes, Firebolt again I guess. Still it's a really cool class and when not in combat feels really good to play.
Reminder that you don't have to give the infusions you have away - they are your main class feature, not gear for the other players - you can give it away sometimes , but keep that mainly for yourself.
The combat options of the Artificer depend a lot on the subclass I think. I play an battle smith with a heavy crossbow(+repeating shot) and she hits hard. I don't even have an offensive cantrip and the only combat spells I regularly use are Shield and Cure Wounds.
The Artificer isn't a pure caster so he won't hold up in combat if you only trust in that.
I been playing an artillerist artificer, and I can say the damage can be swingy on him. The Eldritch cannon is very powerful early on, and at level 6 gets pretty powerful with 3d8. Main attack is fire bolt though, and if you don’t have the elemental adept feat then damage will definitely drop off. I almost argue it is more important than getting a 20 in intelligence just so your main damage doesn’t get reduced by resistance.
i can say that the arcane firearm is pretty fun to have as well. 2d10 + 1d8 Fire damage per round can be amazing, and you can consistently hit with that if you have your enhanced arcane focus active and on your person.
also it’s worthy to note just how versatile you can be. The Protector Eldritch cannon can provide persistent protection with temp HP, you can take Blur, which allows you to be a lot harder to hit and spam shield for when you are hit. On offense the artillerist can toss out spells like shatter and thunder wave for some nice AOE, and combined with the flame thrower you have AOE attacks without a problem on a single turn. Or, you can go with the Eldritch cannon and Firebolt spell like I usually do, and take two pretty strong shots at enemies every turn.
I can see why they say they may be a little less damaging than other classes, but I still think this class is pretty good.
Well I'm actually about to swap my subclass from alchemist and was thinking of going Artillerist so I'm really happy to hear your opinions about the other ones. I did consider going Battlesmith with a crossbow build, but I tend to prefer being more of a caster, though robot is so cool. Makes it tough to decide.
I basically play a gunslinger Artificer by having the cannon be tiny to hold it, but your turret is basically a robot too. I don’t usually play it without holding the cannon, but the things you can do is pretty fun with it. I’m going to be trying a scuttling flamethrower turret next time I play, but since you can determine how it looks then I think you can go crazy there too.
The strength of an artificer lies very much on which magic items they have. It is, after all, what the class is known for. If you know what you want your artificer to do, you can get the right items and be fairly powerful, or at least useful. The All-Purpose Tool gives a +1 (or +2 or +3, depending on rarity) to all spell attacks and spell save DCs, while practically giving you proficiency with every tool set in the game. In addition to this, you get to have one new cantrip every day (for 8 hours, not sure why they added that particular stipulation but it doesn't make much difference in practice), from ANY spell list. So if you are familiar with magic items, or are willing to be creative with your DM to make your own custom items, I think the artificer is fairly balanced.
(plus, they can craft items not only for themselves but given enough downtime, the whole party can be fitted with nice items that they otherwise wouldn't have had. Yeah the artificer may not be a tank in battle, and they require more *creativity* to be useful than other classes do, but they can be a beast of a supporting character in my opinion)