I love the Artificer class, it's my favorite class. But I've been thinking, why exactly is the artificer half spellcaster? Sure, the class has infusions and is capable of attune up to 6 magic items. But I think there were some spells that could be so awesome in an artificer.
Like Reincarnate (level 5 druid spell), but instead of a random race, always create a Warforged, just imagine something like a Frankenstein! Revive your friend as a machine, so he can instantly go back to adventure again (sure, as a level 1...) .
Other Time Stop (please! It's a time stop machine!) or a full equiped laboratory using Magnificent Mansion, Sunbeam for Artillerist, Heal for Alchemist, and a Battlesmith with an Arcane Sword attached to its steel defender. Also, Project Image for an Armourer.
I think so many things could've been possible if the artificer was a full spellcaster, specially when bard is also a full spellcaster and has more flexibility. Please, someone explain me why exactly the artificer is not a full spellcaster?
Jeez imagine how powerful a battle smith or artillerist would be if they could cast 9th level spells...
Alchemist probably should be a full spellcaster, but it would be too complicated to split a subclass up like that. Maybe they should have gotten something like Warlock mystic arcanum.
I do think there should be subclasses with something along tthe lines of Mystic Araneums.
Alchemist and my hypothetical "enchanter" subclasses could stand to do pseudo extra casting.
Alchemists should've had considerably bigger pool of Elixirs, and their lv 9 lesser restoration should have also been Prayer of Healing (Because majority of the time? that lesser restoration never happens) fluffed with making a big batch of elixirs. Adding in a lot more free elixirs, as well as free prayer of healing group heals. would've solidified the class's pseudo casting. Well and you know... actually get cantrips that work with the class abilities.
my hypothetical but someday I hope happens enchanter subclass takes the "spell tokens" from the 2017/18 UA version where they could make several spell items. and in effect they gain extra spell levels per day to break up into one or more items they could make. Then toss in lv 9 and above getting some pseudo mystic arcaneum style boosts.
I think it would've been really neat to format the class similar to this. WIth blaster style martials, and then some caster focused ones.
Ultimately I think that would be the coolest way to pull off some 'pseudo full casters" with subclasses gaining features that result in having more casts or pseudo casts per day than the martial versions. Then better subclass spell lists-or even leaning into the ARtificer concept and let the subclass spell list be half set, but also able to cherry pick a few specific choices from other classes. To represent their special sort of breakthrough
You should look into the Maverick sublcass from Exploring Eberron. It's a spellcasting-focused artificer that learns extra spells from other class lists, gets to upcast spells for free, and eventually gets extra spell slots. You end up with something of a 3/4 caster, which I think is awesome. Of course, you'll have to talk to your DM about using 3rd party content.
I guess I'm an odd one. I feel like they leaned way too into the magic with the final product. We're talking about a mad inventor type class but now everything poofs into existance. It's lost most of the feel of tinkering things together despite the end results are still those tinkered things. I liked it more when it was creating magic through mechanical effects and machinations rather than the mechanical effects and machinations all entirely through magic.
Full caster artificer... At which point, I'm afraid it would simply feel like another wizard clone, and we'd have less options for using of magical tools. I mean, Trasmutation wizard covers a lot of this archetype already.
That is def why I'd prefer them to gbe pseudo full casters. I'd love if they had more lower stuff, item centric goodness. Similiar to how the Alchemist should've been' with a high conversion rate between Elixir and Spell Slots. Pseudo lots of casts in item forms.
So instead of high power they get a lot of staying power so to speak.
I love the Artificer class, it's my favorite class. But I've been thinking, why exactly is the artificer half spellcaster? Sure, the class has infusions and is capable of attune up to 6 magic items. But I think there were some spells that could be so awesome in an artificer.
Like Reincarnate (level 5 druid spell), but instead of a random race, always create a Warforged, just imagine something like a Frankenstein! Revive your friend as a machine, so he can instantly go back to adventure again (sure, as a level 1...) .
Other Time Stop (please! It's a time stop machine!) or a full equiped laboratory using Magnificent Mansion, Sunbeam for Artillerist, Heal for Alchemist, and a Battlesmith with an Arcane Sword attached to its steel defender. Also, Project Image for an Armourer.
I think so many things could've been possible if the artificer was a full spellcaster, specially when bard is also a full spellcaster and has more flexibility. Please, someone explain me why exactly the artificer is not a full spellcaster?
i mean the alchemist already gets heal as part of one of their class features and you already have 5th level spells so such a homebrew spell would not be unreasonable (allthough i will argue that resetting a character to 1st level is something no ressurection spell should ever do, and it would be redundant when you have revivify)
If i were to guess as to why they are half casters instead of full casters, it is probably becuase that gives them more space to work with when giving the class its own identity, typically full casters never get class features the same level as they get acess to a new spell level, so that would mean that an full casting artificer would have to be balanced by getting special class features less often, you might not have gotten magic item adept, master and savant, you might not have gotten spell-storing item or flash of genius
it could also have to do with how the class worked and felt in 3rd edition and 4th edition where its mechanics were way different, it had "infusions" wich were just spells with extra steps and they gained them at a rate similar to the bard of that edition with their strongest infusions being of 6th level
furthermore it might simply have been to make it feel more different and special than other classes, again both with that half-casting made gave them more room for class features and thus more room for special class features to make them feel unique and that it would differ them more greatly from other arcane full casters at the table, the bard, sorcerer, warlock and wizard etc. the first 5e version of the artificer in the UA was a wizard subclass, something people complained about and they likely would not want to repeat that misstake by making the artificer an intelegence based full caster with a largely similar spell list to the wizard and a similar materialistic gimmic/ quirck to their spellcasting
I will say it is frustrating tho, not becuase i am particularly interested in the higher level spells an potential full caster artificer could cast, there are not a lot that would be that thrilling for the artificer, but merely becuase a lot of really cool and flavourful spells like summon construct, fabricate and wall of stone that are perfectly on brand for the artificer are locked behind 13th and 17th level when most wizard could acess these spells at 7th and 9th level
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Which is why I like the 5th level slots; but think that they need the "subclass" to load up on pseudo casting.
BS and Artilrist are fine; the BS gets multi attacks and the pet; so they're not really caster centric. They're golemmancers with a weapon.
Artilriist-their Turret acts as a pseudo concentrationless damage spell. So it feels pretty okay. both of those subclasses have longeviety.
Armourer I have not had enough experience with. Though I have ideas on them. but they feel like they ought to be more weapon like BS; though I lean far more into the ranged lightning blaster style than melee.
Alchemist is the best example of what I want in the subclass concepts for higher casters-But it is badly done currently and I would change it. Just a ton of the elixers (profiendy bonus) and a high conversion of 1 slot to multikpe elixirs. That would create a pseudo lots of casting. Where you get a lot of spell effect items, out of 1 spell slot. (random per day = profiency, and 1 slot = random per day is my favorite method; then add a Bonus Action to drink them). Its a neat idea ultimately. Also I'd swap out the Alch Tool thing for Prototype Philospher Stone; which is why the elixirs are random. Each day it changes and evolves due to the exposure to the enviroment and or spells in the last day. So you get random elixirs while you figure out the new set up. Also is the item requried for class abilities; maybe also count as alchemy tools. (but I'm also weird in that I think the temp HP as a bonus action should be Alchemist not Artilirists as well. Make it a single target Int+Level, range 60. Though at this point Im making a new subclass)
WHich leads me to something in general I think the classes could use. A few more lower level slots; as well as a few custom spells. lv 1 spell; concentration or concentrationless. Create a known but not in use infusion for 1 hour. (and probably include wording to prevent elsewhere storage bombs. or just trust GMs to stop that). Restricted to Artificer
Last thing I still think the class would've benefited from is the Spell Tokens from UA. Where you could cast your spell into an item and hand it out; Except I would use this to give the Pseudo Extra Castings Per Day. Make it Prof or Int spell levels per day. So you could make 3 level 1 slots, or one level 3 for instance. It affords the classes a few extra spells, or uses. while also adding to the classes' infusion concept of handing out items. I'd also restrict this from the Infusion Spell though.
This way, each subclass has their "item" and then each subclass gets a few extra castings via spell token which fills out lower slots or a few higher oness, and then they have their class innate item for longeviety;. So in effect they become Half Casters with a lot of "staying power" instead of full casters with a lot of "power" it provides them a niche, and really fullfills the "item lord" aesthetic from earlier editions. handing out infusions, spell tokens, and having a subclass item.
If you want to be more of a spellcaster it's easy to take 3 or 5 levels of artificer and then multiclass into wizard. The wizard will only be losing 1 or 2 caster levels vs. a pure wizard.
A level 10 Artificer has a total of 9 spell slots. A level 5 artificer/5 wizard has 12 spell slots. In both cases the highest level of spells known is 3rd, but the multiclasser will have a couple 4th level slots they can use on upcasted lower level spells. If you go all the way to 20th level, 3 levels in artificer won't stop you from learning level 9 wizard spells. 5 levels in artificer would still let you learn up to level 8 wizard spells.
If i were to guess as to why they are half casters instead of full casters, it is probably becuase that gives them more space to work with when giving the class its own identity, typically full casters never get class features the same level as they get acess to a new spell level, so that would mean that an full casting artificer would have to be balanced by getting special class features less often, you might not have gotten magic item adept, master and savant, you might not have gotten spell-storing item or flash of genius
furthermore it might simply have been to make it feel more different and special than other classes, again both with that half-casting made gave them more room for class features and thus more room for special class features to make them feel unique and that it would differ them more greatly from other arcane full casters at the table, the bard, sorcerer, warlock and wizard etc. the first 5e version of the artificer in the UA was a wizard subclass, something people complained about and they likely would not want to repeat that misstake by making the artificer an intelegence based full caster with a largely similar spell list to the wizard and a similar materialistic gimmic/ quirck to their spellcasting
I will say what you're saying sounds nice, but ultimately when compaed to some of the other casting classes doesn't work. Compare it to the bard, full caster and gets something at every level.
I would like to see more steampunk / fantasy tech / flavor and having 9th level spell slots doesn't really work. Having 'arcanum' similiar to a warlock seems better but I think still misses the mark. i'd argue to let them create uncommon magic items quickly (not per the standard or updated creation rules in TCoE) and then at high tier make rare and very rare at the same speed. The current crafting rules basically prevent crafting, both organized play or homebrew. Sure there may be a campiagn that give you 6 to 18 months downtime but I've never heard of one.
Bard should also have been a half-caster like Artificer is this edition IMO.
Not quiet. I think they need something like 2/3 caster. I can easily see bards and artificers reaching 7th level spells or equavilent ability at say 18th or 19th level.
Bard should also have been a “half-caster” 6/10 caster like Artificer is this edition IMO.
Not quiet. I think they need something like 2/3 caster. I can easily see bards and artificers reaching 7th level spells or equavilent ability at say 18th or 19th level.
Artificers are already 6/10 casters going from Cantrip to 5th. In 2e, Bards were more like what the Arcane Trickster is now, only as a half-caster instead of a 1/3 caster.
Bard should also have been a half-caster like Artificer is this edition IMO.
Not quiet. I think they need something like 2/3 caster. I can easily see bards and artificers reaching 7th level spells or equavilent ability at say 18th or 19th level.
Artificers are already 6/10 casters going from Cantrip to 5th. In 2e, Bards were more like what the Arcane Trickster is now, only as a half-caster instead of a 1/3 caster.
I'd really prefer the equavilent (creating actual magic items, handing out magic items and still being able to do something) instead of higher casting level.
As for 2e who cares. This isn't 2e and what the point in comparing to older editions. If you're gong to do that lookup a 1e bard (1e DMG) or a 2e warlock (Al-Qadim) and compare those.
I barely played 1e, and never played in the Al-Qadim setting, so I cannot speak to those with any authority. I still say that Bards should be 6/10 casters like Artificers and not full casters. As full casters, they put other full casters to shame in some ways, (especially their Cha-caster counterpart the Sorcerer). They get full caster progression and a whole suite of features, more than any other full-caster. I lrvls the features though, so I think it would be more balanced if they only had C-5th-Level spells and 4 subclass feature levels like the rest of the classes get. If you disagree with my opinion, that’s your prerogative. But it’s no reason to tell me my opinion is invalid.
As for the Artificer, I agree with you that it would be nice if they did more magic item stuff and maybe not so much on the Spellcasting. Y’know, like they did in 3e. 😜
I love the Artificer class, it's my favorite class. But I've been thinking, why exactly is the artificer half spellcaster? Sure, the class has infusions and is capable of attune up to 6 magic items. But I think there were some spells that could be so awesome in an artificer.
Like Reincarnate (level 5 druid spell), but instead of a random race, always create a Warforged, just imagine something like a Frankenstein! Revive your friend as a machine, so he can instantly go back to adventure again (sure, as a level 1...) .
Other Time Stop (please! It's a time stop machine!) or a full equiped laboratory using Magnificent Mansion, Sunbeam for Artillerist, Heal for Alchemist, and a Battlesmith with an Arcane Sword attached to its steel defender. Also, Project Image for an Armourer.
I think so many things could've been possible if the artificer was a full spellcaster, specially when bard is also a full spellcaster and has more flexibility. Please, someone explain me why exactly the artificer is not a full spellcaster?
Jeez imagine how powerful a battle smith or artillerist would be if they could cast 9th level spells...
Alchemist probably should be a full spellcaster, but it would be too complicated to split a subclass up like that. Maybe they should have gotten something like Warlock mystic arcanum.
I do think there should be subclasses with something along tthe lines of Mystic Araneums.
Alchemist and my hypothetical "enchanter" subclasses could stand to do pseudo extra casting.
Alchemists should've had considerably bigger pool of Elixirs, and their lv 9 lesser restoration should have also been Prayer of Healing (Because majority of the time? that lesser restoration never happens) fluffed with making a big batch of elixirs. Adding in a lot more free elixirs, as well as free prayer of healing group heals. would've solidified the class's pseudo casting. Well and you know... actually get cantrips that work with the class abilities.
my hypothetical but someday I hope happens enchanter subclass takes the "spell tokens" from the 2017/18 UA version where they could make several spell items. and in effect they gain extra spell levels per day to break up into one or more items they could make. Then toss in lv 9 and above getting some pseudo mystic arcaneum style boosts.
I think it would've been really neat to format the class similar to this. WIth blaster style martials, and then some caster focused ones.
Ultimately I think that would be the coolest way to pull off some 'pseudo full casters" with subclasses gaining features that result in having more casts or pseudo casts per day than the martial versions. Then better subclass spell lists-or even leaning into the ARtificer concept and let the subclass spell list be half set, but also able to cherry pick a few specific choices from other classes. To represent their special sort of breakthrough
You should look into the Maverick sublcass from Exploring Eberron. It's a spellcasting-focused artificer that learns extra spells from other class lists, gets to upcast spells for free, and eventually gets extra spell slots. You end up with something of a 3/4 caster, which I think is awesome. Of course, you'll have to talk to your DM about using 3rd party content.
I guess I'm an odd one. I feel like they leaned way too into the magic with the final product. We're talking about a mad inventor type class but now everything poofs into existance. It's lost most of the feel of tinkering things together despite the end results are still those tinkered things. I liked it more when it was creating magic through mechanical effects and machinations rather than the mechanical effects and machinations all entirely through magic.
Full caster artificer... At which point, I'm afraid it would simply feel like another wizard clone, and we'd have less options for using of magical tools. I mean, Trasmutation wizard covers a lot of this archetype already.
That is def why I'd prefer them to gbe pseudo full casters. I'd love if they had more lower stuff, item centric goodness. Similiar to how the Alchemist should've been' with a high conversion rate between Elixir and Spell Slots. Pseudo lots of casts in item forms.
So instead of high power they get a lot of staying power so to speak.
i mean the alchemist already gets heal as part of one of their class features and you already have 5th level spells so such a homebrew spell would not be unreasonable (allthough i will argue that resetting a character to 1st level is something no ressurection spell should ever do, and it would be redundant when you have revivify)
If i were to guess as to why they are half casters instead of full casters, it is probably becuase that gives them more space to work with when giving the class its own identity, typically full casters never get class features the same level as they get acess to a new spell level, so that would mean that an full casting artificer would have to be balanced by getting special class features less often, you might not have gotten magic item adept, master and savant, you might not have gotten spell-storing item or flash of genius
it could also have to do with how the class worked and felt in 3rd edition and 4th edition where its mechanics were way different, it had "infusions" wich were just spells with extra steps and they gained them at a rate similar to the bard of that edition with their strongest infusions being of 6th level
furthermore it might simply have been to make it feel more different and special than other classes, again both with that half-casting made gave them more room for class features and thus more room for special class features to make them feel unique and that it would differ them more greatly from other arcane full casters at the table, the bard, sorcerer, warlock and wizard etc. the first 5e version of the artificer in the UA was a wizard subclass, something people complained about and they likely would not want to repeat that misstake by making the artificer an intelegence based full caster with a largely similar spell list to the wizard and a similar materialistic gimmic/ quirck to their spellcasting
I will say it is frustrating tho, not becuase i am particularly interested in the higher level spells an potential full caster artificer could cast, there are not a lot that would be that thrilling for the artificer, but merely becuase a lot of really cool and flavourful spells like summon construct, fabricate and wall of stone that are perfectly on brand for the artificer are locked behind 13th and 17th level when most wizard could acess these spells at 7th and 9th level
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
The original Artificer was not a spellcaster, it only had a few spells to enchant items, and everything else was down to their gizmos.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Which is what they should ve done if we are being honest
Which is why I like the 5th level slots; but think that they need the "subclass" to load up on pseudo casting.
both of those subclasses have longeviety.
WHich leads me to something in general I think the classes could use. A few more lower level slots; as well as a few custom spells. lv 1 spell; concentration or concentrationless. Create a known but not in use infusion for 1 hour. (and probably include wording to prevent elsewhere storage bombs. or just trust GMs to stop that). Restricted to Artificer
Last thing I still think the class would've benefited from is the Spell Tokens from UA. Where you could cast your spell into an item and hand it out; Except I would use this to give the Pseudo Extra Castings Per Day. Make it Prof or Int spell levels per day. So you could make 3 level 1 slots, or one level 3 for instance. It affords the classes a few extra spells, or uses. while also adding to the classes' infusion concept of handing out items. I'd also restrict this from the Infusion Spell though.
This way, each subclass has their "item" and then each subclass gets a few extra castings via spell token which fills out lower slots or a few higher oness, and then they have their class innate item for longeviety;. So in effect they become Half Casters with a lot of "staying power" instead of full casters with a lot of "power" it provides them a niche, and really fullfills the "item lord" aesthetic from earlier editions. handing out infusions, spell tokens, and having a subclass item.
Which UA has the spell tokens? I've googled it and I can't find any reference to it
THe one from around 2017/18 ish I believe? Was one of the earlier versions of the artificer.
If you want to be more of a spellcaster it's easy to take 3 or 5 levels of artificer and then multiclass into wizard. The wizard will only be losing 1 or 2 caster levels vs. a pure wizard.
A level 10 Artificer has a total of 9 spell slots. A level 5 artificer/5 wizard has 12 spell slots. In both cases the highest level of spells known is 3rd, but the multiclasser will have a couple 4th level slots they can use on upcasted lower level spells. If you go all the way to 20th level, 3 levels in artificer won't stop you from learning level 9 wizard spells. 5 levels in artificer would still let you learn up to level 8 wizard spells.
I will say what you're saying sounds nice, but ultimately when compaed to some of the other casting classes doesn't work. Compare it to the bard, full caster and gets something at every level.
I would like to see more steampunk / fantasy tech / flavor and having 9th level spell slots doesn't really work. Having 'arcanum' similiar to a warlock seems better but I think still misses the mark. i'd argue to let them create uncommon magic items quickly (not per the standard or updated creation rules in TCoE) and then at high tier make rare and very rare at the same speed. The current crafting rules basically prevent crafting, both organized play or homebrew. Sure there may be a campiagn that give you 6 to 18 months downtime but I've never heard of one.
Bard should also have been a “
half-caster” 6/10 caster like Artificer is this edition IMO.Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Not quiet. I think they need something like 2/3 caster. I can easily see bards and artificers reaching 7th level spells or equavilent ability at say 18th or 19th level.
Artificers are already 6/10 casters going from Cantrip to 5th. In 2e, Bards were more like what the Arcane Trickster is now, only as a half-caster instead of a 1/3 caster.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'd really prefer the equavilent (creating actual magic items, handing out magic items and still being able to do something) instead of higher casting level.
As for 2e who cares. This isn't 2e and what the point in comparing to older editions. If you're gong to do that lookup a 1e bard (1e DMG) or a 2e warlock (Al-Qadim) and compare those.
I barely played 1e, and never played in the Al-Qadim setting, so I cannot speak to those with any authority. I still say that Bards should be 6/10 casters like Artificers and not full casters. As full casters, they put other full casters to shame in some ways, (especially their Cha-caster counterpart the Sorcerer). They get full caster progression and a whole suite of features, more than any other full-caster. I lrvls the features though, so I think it would be more balanced if they only had C-5th-Level spells and 4 subclass feature levels like the rest of the classes get. If you disagree with my opinion, that’s your prerogative. But it’s no reason to tell me my opinion is invalid.
As for the Artificer, I agree with you that it would be nice if they did more magic item stuff and maybe not so much on the Spellcasting. Y’know, like they did in 3e. 😜
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting