We've decided to convert our game to 2024, but I have an artificer in my group, and I kind of feel like they're being left out. What are other DMs doing with their artificer PCs?
I don't want to homebrew my own 2024 artificer, but every other half-caster (rangers/paladins) got weapon mastery, is that reasonable to give them?
Hm, the way I see it every class except for the Monk either has Weapon Mastery or Cantrips, but no class has both.
Martials get Weapon Mastery (except Monk because they are specialized on unarmed combat)
Full casters get Cantrips
Ranger and Paladin are half caster with Weapon Mastery but no Cantrips
Artificers are half casters with Cantrips, so I think they don't need Weapon Mastery
I would probably just leave the Artificer as is. Just update their species and background, and then let them re-choose their ASIs. That way, if they really want, they can take a Weapon Mastery Feat at an ASI.
As DerManiac said, the classes with Weapon Masteries all have martial weapons and don't get cantrips (Paladin and Ranger have to give up a Fighting Style to get them.) Even the spellcasting classes that have the option to make use of melee combat (e.g. College of Valor Bards) don't get Weapon Masteries out of the deal even though they get Extra Attack.
Additionally, the design of the Artificer is a lot less dated than the 2014 classes. For instance, they already came with the ability to change out a cantrip on every single level up, whereas the other classes couldn't do that at all in 2014 and could only do it when they gained an ASI using the optional rules in Tasha's. The Armorer's arcane armors effectively have mastery properties built in (Thunder Gauntlets are almost identical to Sap, Lightning Launcher is comparable to Cleave.) Many of their subclasses are noticeably stronger than the sorts of features that were put into the 2014 PHB subclasses. I've been playing an Artillerist for the past two years and I've gotten an insane amount of mileage out of Arcane Cannons and Eldritch Firearm.
Granted, the Artificer is a bit of a special case, but it still leans predominantly towards spellcasting, so I don't think it makes sense to give it masteries by default. It'd be thematic for the Battle Smith considering their Battle Ready and Extra Attack features, but considering they get to keep their cantrips, get to attack with Intelligence (which is basically the Warlock's Pact of the Blade) and they're getting a Steel Defender to assist them that can also take reactions...nah. They've got a lot going on combat-wise already.
If the player really wants mastery properties they always have the option of taking the new Weapon Master feat. If not, they're still getting some improved cantrips (e.g. Guidance, Resistance, Acid Splash, Poison Spray, Spare the Dying) and an Origin Feat (which are all pretty good in my opinion) out of the transition.
I agree with the above, no Weapon Mastery unless they spend a feat to get it. The only thing you might want to consider is giving the subclasses that get Extra Attack a third attack at level 10+ like the Pact of the Blade Warlock has. IMO Artificer is mechanically similar to an INT-based warlock - they get infusions instead of Invocations, and half casting instead of Pact Magic - despite being very different thematically.
I agree with the above, no Weapon Mastery unless they spend a feat to get it. The only thing you might want to consider is giving the subclasses that get Extra Attack a third attack at level 10+ like the Pact of the Blade Warlock has. IMO Artificer is mechanically similar to an INT-based warlock - they get infusions instead of Invocations, and half casting instead of Pact Magic - despite being very different thematically.
I'm hesitant to suggest even that. The Warlock has to give up yet another Invocation for that third attack, and they don't have much to do with their Bonus Action (they can theoretically TWF, but it's going to be extremely lackluster for multiple reasons; there's no such thing as double Light pact weapons.) The Battle Smith always has a 1d8 + PB Bonus Action magical attack as long as their Steel Defender is alive (even if they're using a two-handed weapon or cast a cantrip), and they get to add Arcane Jolts on top.
EDIT: Considering cantrip swapping isn't an exclusive perk for them any more, I'd throw them an extra cantrip so they can retain some of that extra versatility. They have a fairly narrow pool of cantrips compared to other arcane spellcasters, too.
EDIT 2: Actually it's really bizarre they don't always have Mending prepared considering how many of their subclass features interact with it and how many spellcasting classes got similar concessions in the 2024 PHB (Paladins with Find Steed, Rangers with Hunter's Mark, Druids with Speak With Animals.) That'd free up one of their 2 cantrip slots. Magical Tinkering kinda counts as one too (it's similar to cantrips like Prestidigitation or Elementalism) so I'm not sure they actually need a higher number when they're only a half-caster and have their Infusions, but giving them a 3rd one on top of Mending wouldn't exactly break the game if you're feeling generous.
Hm, the way I see it every class except for the Monk either has Weapon Mastery or Cantrips, but no class has both.
Martials get Weapon Mastery (except Monk because they are specialized on unarmed combat)
Full Casters get Cantrips
Ranger and Paladin are half-caster with Weapon Mastery but no Cantrips
Artificers are half-casters with Cantrips, so I think they don't need Weapon Mastery
I would probably just leave the Artificer as is. Just update their species and background, and then let them re-choose their ASIs. That way, if they really want, they can take a Weapon Mastery Feat at an ASI.
I see your point.
My only rebuttal would be that rangers and paladins can indeed get cantrips if they choose the fighting style that gives it to them. Even fighters can get cantrips if they go eldritch knight. -Not to mention the origin feat arcane initiate gives cantrips, which is available to literally every character out there at level 1. There's no origin feat that gives weapon mastery.
I would say that if updating to the 2024 rules leaves one of your characters behind, don't do it. Wait until Artificer comes out as well.
Also, why is artificer not included in the 2024 rules? It's been a class for years now!
I think that ship has sailed, everyone agreed too (including artificer player), and everyone has already converted. For now, the Artificer player just converted the feats/origins and kept the Artificer stuff from Tasha's, per the new book guidelines. I think they will be fine ultimately, and the player is happy and having fun, so I'm probably going to leave it alone. But I thought it was a good conversation to have.
I would say it really depends on the player - if they play their artificer more as a caster some of the suggestions above are excellent - if they play their character as a more melee focused build you can always just allow an extra infusion that is combat related.
I typically error on the side of giving players more rather than less - it makes the players happy and does not cost anything or have real impact unless your handing out wands of Meteor Swarms or Wishes.
I would say that if updating to the 2024 rules leaves one of your characters behind, don't do it. Wait until Artificer comes out as well.
Also, why is artificer not included in the 2024 rules? It's been a class for years now!
Because it doesn't fit the core fantasy of D&D. Same reason the animal people weren't added in to the PHP. Basically they didn't want options people were going to autoban in games.
I would say that if updating to the 2024 rules leaves one of your characters behind, don't do it. Wait until Artificer comes out as well.
Also, why is artificer not included in the 2024 rules? It's been a class for years now!
Because it doesn't fit the core fantasy of D&D. Same reason the animal people weren't added in to the PHP. Basically they didn't want options people were going to autoban in games.
I've heard this a couple of times, but why is that? The core fantasy has magical items, so what's so offensive about someone who can make them? How does it not make sense that some wizards would focus their wizardry on improving equipment? Is a Homunculus Servant really so out of place in a world where Modrons and Golems exist?
The Forgotten Realms lore even had some wizards that we'd call Artificers even if they are never officially called that. Trobriand, the Metal Mage, is a perfect example of an Artificer in Forgotten Realms lore. And the island of Lantan is basically home to nothing but Artificers.
The only reason I can see why some people say it doesn't fit is because people like to give them a steampunk flavor. But I think every class can be given a setting inappropriate flavor.
The only reason I can see why some people say it doesn't fit is because people like to give them a steampunk flavor.
Or its because one subclass gets a flamethrower, another gets a robot dog companion, and another is basically Iron Man. Sure Artificer can be flavoured as an enhanting wizard type but that isn't their default flavour. Their default flavour is streampunk or anime mechs.
The only reason I can see why some people say it doesn't fit is because people like to give them a steampunk flavor.
Or its because one subclass gets a flamethrower, another gets a robot dog companion, and another is basically Iron Man. Sure Artificer can be flavoured as an enhanting wizard type but that isn't their default flavour. Their default flavour is streampunk or anime mechs.
I grant you that the Armorer's Arcane Armor is a bit out there, but the rest just sounds like regular construct making, which is absolutely a thing in Forgotten Realms lore. There are prewritten adventures that have sentinels like the Steel Defender or Animated Ballista like the Eldritch Cannon. And again, Modrons exist, and Trobriand is basically an Armorer Artificer taken to the max, from the mechanics guild in Sigil, a place in Forgotten Realms lore.
And let's not forget that even 2024 rules include a Clockwork Sorcerer who gets their power from Mechanus, the realm of clockworks, Modrons, and Primus the Borg Queen the Supreme Modron.
the mechanics guild in Sigil, a place in Forgotten Realms lore
Sigil is not the default setting for 5e though, the Sword Coast is the default setting for 5e as evidenced by the fact that a majority of prewritten modules have at least 1 chapter set there.
If 5e swapped to having Sigil being the most prominent setting, and Mechanus actually be used for more than a couple of sentence explanation here and there in the flavour text then sure. But I've met many long-term DMs who knew basically nothing about Mechanus or the Modrons beyond than "hey, they exist".
the mechanics guild in Sigil, a place in Forgotten Realms lore
Sigil is not the default setting for 5e though, the Sword Coast is the default setting for 5e as evidenced by the fact that a majority of prewritten modules have at least 1 chapter set there.
If 5e swapped to having Sigil being the most prominent setting, and Mechanus actually be used for more than a couple of sentence explanation here and there in the flavour text then sure. But I've met many long-term DMs who knew basically nothing about Mechanus or the Modrons beyond than "hey, they exist".
My point is that Sigil, Mechanus, and Modrons exist in the Forgotten Realms lore, and are referenced in official Forgotten Realms adventures, and 2024 rules even have a Sorcerer subclass that references Mechanus and Modrons, so why would Artificers be out of place in a Forgotten Realms campaign?
And how many DMs can explain how Druid magic works other than "hey, it works"? Doesn't mean Druid magic doesn't fit in the setting.
WotC want your money when they come out with their next book of course!
If they really wanted to twist your arm that way they wouldn't have released a backwards compatible update, they would've released 6th edition and invalidated the past 10 years' worth of books.
The most likely reason they didn't reprint the Artificer is that it's already up to the standard of the 2024 classes/subclasses and is part of the same book that most of the new feats and spells in the 2024 PHB come from. The new PHB is already 70 pages larger than the 2014 one, and more page count means higher costs. Why would they waste pages on a class that doesn't need major changes when they have new subclasses to add, a bunch of content from XGtE and TCoE that would enhance the existing classes (e.g. the Conjurer wizard badly needed the Summon spells from Tasha's), and there are existing subclasses that need major tweaks to account for the new rules (e.g. the Soulknife Rogue needed a Mastery Property for their psychic blades)?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Forum Infestation (TM)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
We've decided to convert our game to 2024, but I have an artificer in my group, and I kind of feel like they're being left out. What are other DMs doing with their artificer PCs?
I don't want to homebrew my own 2024 artificer, but every other half-caster (rangers/paladins) got weapon mastery, is that reasonable to give them?
Hm, the way I see it every class except for the Monk either has Weapon Mastery or Cantrips, but no class has both.
I would probably just leave the Artificer as is. Just update their species and background, and then let them re-choose their ASIs. That way, if they really want, they can take a Weapon Mastery Feat at an ASI.
As DerManiac said, the classes with Weapon Masteries all have martial weapons and don't get cantrips (Paladin and Ranger have to give up a Fighting Style to get them.) Even the spellcasting classes that have the option to make use of melee combat (e.g. College of Valor Bards) don't get Weapon Masteries out of the deal even though they get Extra Attack.
Additionally, the design of the Artificer is a lot less dated than the 2014 classes. For instance, they already came with the ability to change out a cantrip on every single level up, whereas the other classes couldn't do that at all in 2014 and could only do it when they gained an ASI using the optional rules in Tasha's. The Armorer's arcane armors effectively have mastery properties built in (Thunder Gauntlets are almost identical to Sap, Lightning Launcher is comparable to Cleave.) Many of their subclasses are noticeably stronger than the sorts of features that were put into the 2014 PHB subclasses. I've been playing an Artillerist for the past two years and I've gotten an insane amount of mileage out of Arcane Cannons and Eldritch Firearm.
Granted, the Artificer is a bit of a special case, but it still leans predominantly towards spellcasting, so I don't think it makes sense to give it masteries by default. It'd be thematic for the Battle Smith considering their Battle Ready and Extra Attack features, but considering they get to keep their cantrips, get to attack with Intelligence (which is basically the Warlock's Pact of the Blade) and they're getting a Steel Defender to assist them that can also take reactions...nah. They've got a lot going on combat-wise already.
If the player really wants mastery properties they always have the option of taking the new Weapon Master feat. If not, they're still getting some improved cantrips (e.g. Guidance, Resistance, Acid Splash, Poison Spray, Spare the Dying) and an Origin Feat (which are all pretty good in my opinion) out of the transition.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I agree with the above, no Weapon Mastery unless they spend a feat to get it. The only thing you might want to consider is giving the subclasses that get Extra Attack a third attack at level 10+ like the Pact of the Blade Warlock has. IMO Artificer is mechanically similar to an INT-based warlock - they get infusions instead of Invocations, and half casting instead of Pact Magic - despite being very different thematically.
I'm hesitant to suggest even that. The Warlock has to give up yet another Invocation for that third attack, and they don't have much to do with their Bonus Action (they can theoretically TWF, but it's going to be extremely lackluster for multiple reasons; there's no such thing as double Light pact weapons.) The Battle Smith always has a 1d8 + PB Bonus Action magical attack as long as their Steel Defender is alive (even if they're using a two-handed weapon or cast a cantrip), and they get to add Arcane Jolts on top.
EDIT: Considering cantrip swapping isn't an exclusive perk for them any more, I'd throw them an extra cantrip so they can retain some of that extra versatility. They have a fairly narrow pool of cantrips compared to other arcane spellcasters, too.
EDIT 2: Actually it's really bizarre they don't always have Mending prepared considering how many of their subclass features interact with it and how many spellcasting classes got similar concessions in the 2024 PHB (Paladins with Find Steed, Rangers with Hunter's Mark, Druids with Speak With Animals.) That'd free up one of their 2 cantrip slots. Magical Tinkering kinda counts as one too (it's similar to cantrips like Prestidigitation or Elementalism) so I'm not sure they actually need a higher number when they're only a half-caster and have their Infusions, but giving them a 3rd one on top of Mending wouldn't exactly break the game if you're feeling generous.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I see your point.
My only rebuttal would be that rangers and paladins can indeed get cantrips if they choose the fighting style that gives it to them. Even fighters can get cantrips if they go eldritch knight. -Not to mention the origin feat arcane initiate gives cantrips, which is available to literally every character out there at level 1. There's no origin feat that gives weapon mastery.
I would say that if updating to the 2024 rules leaves one of your characters behind, don't do it. Wait until Artificer comes out as well.
Also, why is artificer not included in the 2024 rules? It's been a class for years now!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
WotC want your money when they come out with their next book of course!
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
I think that ship has sailed, everyone agreed too (including artificer player), and everyone has already converted. For now, the Artificer player just converted the feats/origins and kept the Artificer stuff from Tasha's, per the new book guidelines. I think they will be fine ultimately, and the player is happy and having fun, so I'm probably going to leave it alone. But I thought it was a good conversation to have.
I would say it really depends on the player - if they play their artificer more as a caster some of the suggestions above are excellent - if they play their character as a more melee focused build you can always just allow an extra infusion that is combat related.
I typically error on the side of giving players more rather than less - it makes the players happy and does not cost anything or have real impact unless your handing out wands of Meteor Swarms or Wishes.
Because it doesn't fit the core fantasy of D&D. Same reason the animal people weren't added in to the PHP. Basically they didn't want options people were going to autoban in games.
I've heard this a couple of times, but why is that? The core fantasy has magical items, so what's so offensive about someone who can make them? How does it not make sense that some wizards would focus their wizardry on improving equipment? Is a Homunculus Servant really so out of place in a world where Modrons and Golems exist?
The Forgotten Realms lore even had some wizards that we'd call Artificers even if they are never officially called that. Trobriand, the Metal Mage, is a perfect example of an Artificer in Forgotten Realms lore. And the island of Lantan is basically home to nothing but Artificers.
The only reason I can see why some people say it doesn't fit is because people like to give them a steampunk flavor. But I think every class can be given a setting inappropriate flavor.
Or its because one subclass gets a flamethrower, another gets a robot dog companion, and another is basically Iron Man. Sure Artificer can be flavoured as an enhanting wizard type but that isn't their default flavour. Their default flavour is streampunk or anime mechs.
I grant you that the Armorer's Arcane Armor is a bit out there, but the rest just sounds like regular construct making, which is absolutely a thing in Forgotten Realms lore. There are prewritten adventures that have sentinels like the Steel Defender or Animated Ballista like the Eldritch Cannon. And again, Modrons exist, and Trobriand is basically an Armorer Artificer taken to the max, from the mechanics guild in Sigil, a place in Forgotten Realms lore.
And let's not forget that even 2024 rules include a Clockwork Sorcerer who gets their power from Mechanus, the realm of clockworks, Modrons, and Primus
the Borg Queenthe Supreme Modron.Sigil is not the default setting for 5e though, the Sword Coast is the default setting for 5e as evidenced by the fact that a majority of prewritten modules have at least 1 chapter set there.
If 5e swapped to having Sigil being the most prominent setting, and Mechanus actually be used for more than a couple of sentence explanation here and there in the flavour text then sure. But I've met many long-term DMs who knew basically nothing about Mechanus or the Modrons beyond than "hey, they exist".
My point is that Sigil, Mechanus, and Modrons exist in the Forgotten Realms lore, and are referenced in official Forgotten Realms adventures, and 2024 rules even have a Sorcerer subclass that references Mechanus and Modrons, so why would Artificers be out of place in a Forgotten Realms campaign?
And how many DMs can explain how Druid magic works other than "hey, it works"? Doesn't mean Druid magic doesn't fit in the setting.
If they really wanted to twist your arm that way they wouldn't have released a backwards compatible update, they would've released 6th edition and invalidated the past 10 years' worth of books.
The most likely reason they didn't reprint the Artificer is that it's already up to the standard of the 2024 classes/subclasses and is part of the same book that most of the new feats and spells in the 2024 PHB come from. The new PHB is already 70 pages larger than the 2014 one, and more page count means higher costs. Why would they waste pages on a class that doesn't need major changes when they have new subclasses to add, a bunch of content from XGtE and TCoE that would enhance the existing classes (e.g. the Conjurer wizard badly needed the Summon spells from Tasha's), and there are existing subclasses that need major tweaks to account for the new rules (e.g. the Soulknife Rogue needed a Mastery Property for their psychic blades)?
The Forum Infestation (TM)