Where do you find the new new Artificer it is one of my fav classes but I cannot find it
It's not available in the character builder, if that's what you're asking, because it's a pre-release version for playtesting. D&D Beyond's character builder only supports fully published content.
You can always find the latest pre-release playtest stuff by going to the Sources menu at the top of the site and selecting "Unearthed Arcana".
Base DPR 15-16: . . 1 more summon construct. approx 38dpr
Base dpr 17+ 1 animate objects approx 42.65
19
there may be more optimized paths, and at certain point you may get more value giving a martial a flame tongue or +2 weapon over magic missile, but thats roughly your dpr expectation. artificer baseline doesnt have any notable lvl 3 or lower damage spells, so spell storage item wont be used for damage.
and i think i use a higher assumed accuracy(65%) than treantmonk(most of the source for builds) this basically means its the lowest dpr subclass/class in the game.
this assumes 4 four round encounters a day, with you using replicates, and doing damage related actions and spells.
Defenses:
17 ac base 19 with armor. with replicate: 19/21 HP d8 growth. self defensive spells blur, blink, stoneskin, circle of power. Mostly average defsively. can slightly boost their defense or an ally via replicate, if they dont already have magic items.
support abilities
Atlas: +2.5 avg initiative
Atlas: member awareness GPS
Atlas: Cast sight based targted spells on allies as long as they are in range.
ingenious: Move self/allies who fail save/ability rolls
Atlas+: teleport and stabilized downed map holders.
extra casts of faerie fire
and various spells, but as far as a support spell list, its fairly lackluster, and its ahalf caster, so they get these support spells later than other classes, and can cast them less often.
it can support somewhat via replicate items, mostly to bolster defenses, and rarely utility. while they can change an item once per day, they dont have many more plans than replicates.
artificer spells that work with atlas; (that you can cast without seeing)
healing word, enlarge reduce, haste, spare the dying, levitate
item/ability effects that work with atlas:
bandore instrument(levitate), flash of genius, helm of teleportation
other abilities of note:
micro teleports, at the cost of movement, most likely used to disengage, or get through small areas. but they also have a further teleport.
lvl 15 concentration cant be broken by damage. seems great, but artificer is already fairly resistant to losing concentration, cartographer is less likely to be up close, and their concentration list is not mind blowing. As a half caster they get spells later as well.
best uses at 15+ is circle of power, bigby's or animate objects. though animate objects is more likely to die than you lose concentration.
Sub Class concept/fantasy (according to video and my own perspective)
A supportive based scout with strong movement and map awareness.
I'll say it again, if Artificer was a full caster, it would still not be amazing, but would be at least not terrible. As a half caster, the non-casting class features need more oomph. The loss of enspelled items hits this class hard, but ultimately that build, while the only one that allowed it to keep pace with other classes, was not very flavorful and apparently counter to intentions.
If they are dedicated to the Artificer being a half caster, they need to give it more to work with. If they made it a full caster then I think all the subclasses aside from Alchemist and Cartographer are then reasonable. Alchemist would need a bit of a boost and Cartographer would need more of one, but all of them would be far more attractive and competitive with other classes with far less tweaking.
I'll say it again, if Artificer was a full caster, it would still not be amazing, but would be at least not terrible. As a half caster, the non-casting class features need more oomph. The loss of enspelled items hits this class hard, but ultimately that build, while the only one that allowed it to keep pace with other classes, was not very flavorful and apparently counter to intentions.
If they are dedicated to the Artificer being a half caster, they need to give it more to work with. If they made it a full caster then I think all the subclasses aside from Alchemist and Cartographer are then reasonable. Alchemist would need a bit of a boost and Cartographer would need more of one, but all of them would be far more attractive and competitive with other classes with far less tweaking.
I think that, even has a half-caster, the Artillerist, Armorer and Battlesmith are ok, assuming you make good use of your magic items, since at least they have weapon-based combat and other subclass features to use that don't depend entirely on your limited spellcasting.
But yeah, the Alchemist and the new Cartographer...Both have subclass features that enhance spellcasting in a way that becomes kinda useless. They both force you to pick certain types of spells to make use of them: The Alchemist assumes you're going to be casting spells dealing specific damage types and the Cartographer assumes you're going to be casting buff spells on your allies. But with limited spells of the 'right' kind and limited slots, you're going to run out of fuel pretty quick. After the first or second encounter of the day you're basically going to be casting cantrips and hiding.
Considering there’s barely any leveled damage spells on the core Artificer list- and the ones that are there are nearly all covered- and there’s exactly one damage cantrip from the list that you’re actually likely to use on what is clearly a blaster build that isn’t affected by the 5th level feature, the subclass is hardly being all that proscribed from their actual class options.
Artillerist spends slots creating more cannons to last the day while elixirs are like free random bonus spells that can be used on a bonus action and last all day. People seem to look at the artillerist like the free cannons last the adventuring day whey they don't. The elixir choices are also a lot like having 5 more spells known to cast. And let's face it... flying elixirs at 3rd level is very useful.
Elixirs don't require concentration or miscibility rolls so they're good as a stacked buff. An alchemist who picks up bless via magic initiate grants 2-8 attack bonus and 2-8 saving throw bonus at 3rd level before replicating magic items. That's pretty good, tbh. What's also useful is the ability to brew potions at half time. Common and uncommon potions (and scrolls from the Cartographer) can be quickly produced during downtime. Wands, armor, and weapons from other artificers not so much.
Alchemical savant is better than arcane firearm. That static bonus is more reliable and adds to both damage and healing while arcane firearm only adds to damage. And even though it's unlikely to see 20th level+ play the fact that the INT bonus can reach +10 (30 INT) eventually is a better damage bonus too. Hitting 2-3 targets with acid splash for 4d6+5 each, or single target fire bolt for 4d10+5+2d8, isn't the worst damage. With the extra accuracy bonus from the boldness elixir firebolt becomes competitive with a warlock using eldritch blast and agonizing blast. I think the bonus to each eldritch blast still favors the warlock, however; especially under the max 30 INT premise.
The temp hp elixirs grant from the fortify portion of restorative reagents is very good because those temp hp added the artificer's level to them. At 9th level that healing elixir gives ~14hp of healing and 14 temp hp additionally. That eventually becomes 25 temp hp (30 temp hp eventually under the 30 INT premise) with every elixir and 5 free elixirs is already 125 temp hp (also up to 150 temp hp) to apply. Free lesser restoration castings isn't bad either.
A free casting of Tasha's bubbling cauldron isn't actually that powerful but it does add some utility benefits or healing.
There are definitely advantages to playing an alchemist. The drawback is they need to use spell slots to leverage their action economy more than artillerists or battle smiths do.
Under the UA changes, all artificers can use homunculi to increase their damage too. Homunculi take no actions to command. Using my alchemist example, that would be the cantrip damage, the homunculus bonus attack, and sustained damage with the bonus action from something like heat metal or flaming sphere.
It seems to be a common sentiment that Artificers need more spell slots than half-casters get.
It may show my age, but does anyone else remember the 3/4 caster that was a bard? Spells topped out at 6th level, spell advancement was faster than half, slower than full.
not so much artificers overall need more spell slots, just the alchemist and cartographer, And its tight for artillerists early on since eldritch cannon uses slots, bur eventually thats not a huge deal.
Artillerist spends slots creating more cannons to last the day while elixirs are like free random bonus spells that can be used on a bonus action and last all day. People seem to look at the artillerist like the free cannons last the adventuring day whey they don't. The elixir choices are also a lot like having 5 more spells known to cast. And let's face it... flying elixirs at 3rd level is very useful.
Elixirs don't require concentration or miscibility rolls so they're good as a stacked buff. An alchemist who picks up bless via magic initiate grants 2-8 attack bonus and 2-8 saving throw bonus at 3rd level before replicating magic items. That's pretty good, tbh. What's also useful is the ability to brew potions at half time. Common and uncommon potions (and scrolls from the Cartographer) can be quickly produced during downtime. Wands, armor, and weapons from other artificers not so much.
Alchemical savant is better than arcane firearm. That static bonus is more reliable and adds to both damage and healing while arcane firearm only adds to damage. And even though it's unlikely to see 20th level+ play the fact that the INT bonus can reach +10 (30 INT) eventually is a better damage bonus too. Hitting 2-3 targets with acid splash for 4d6+5 each, or single target fire bolt for 4d10+5+2d8, isn't the worst damage. With the extra accuracy bonus from the boldness elixir firebolt becomes competitive with a warlock using eldritch blast and agonizing blast. I think the bonus to each eldritch blast still favors the warlock, however; especially under the max 30 INT premise.
The temp hp elixirs grant from the fortify portion of restorative reagents is very good because those temp hp added the artificer's level to them. At 9th level that healing elixir gives ~14hp of healing and 14 temp hp additionally. That eventually becomes 25 temp hp (30 temp hp eventually under the 30 INT premise) with every elixir and 5 free elixirs is already 125 temp hp (also up to 150 temp hp) to apply. Free lesser restoration castings isn't bad either.
A free casting of Tasha's bubbling cauldron isn't actually that powerful but it does add some utility benefits or healing.
There are definitely advantages to playing an alchemist. The drawback is they need to use spell slots to leverage their action economy more than artillerists or battle smiths do.
Under the UA changes, all artificers can use homunculi to increase their damage too. Homunculi take no actions to command. Using my alchemist example, that would be the cantrip damage, the homunculus bonus attack, and sustained damage with the bonus action from something like heat metal or flaming sphere.
Not as bad as some of y'all thing. ;-)
I am pretty sure Elixirs are supposed to trigger Miscibility and as an Alchemist main I wish they'd give us more options for potions or elixirs overall. In AD&D Alchemist had access to all spells up to level 6 as potions and in 3.5 they had access to all touch or self-targeting spells up to level six. I want that versatility back so bad.
Artillerists I feel are pretty well off but agree with everyone else in asking for more spell slots. I also feel like for Artificers spells should be something infused into items rather than directly cast in order to avoid some niche environmental circumstances such as wild magic or anti-magic spheres. For the Artillerists I think it would be cool if they could also create wands like an Alchemist does with their elixirs giving them the option to cast or infuse a stick with a spell, they can shoot at someone.
Battlesmith needs the most work over all out of the class. The pet isn't great and it doesn't really feel like a smith for battle. I'd rather they gave then the most Magic Plans so they could craft the most enchanted gear. Maybe don't give them any more Attunement slots to balance it. Then they'd feel like a solid smith for the party.
Armorer is great. No complaints and it feels like the subclass the class was designed around in 5e/One.
Cartographer, again, is nearly prefect. They just need to make it a bit more leaned towards stealth by making their Faerie Fire invisible and the like.
Artillerist spends slots creating more cannons to last the day while elixirs are like free random bonus spells that can be used on a bonus action and last all day. People seem to look at the artillerist like the free cannons last the adventuring day whey they don't. The elixir choices are also a lot like having 5 more spells known to cast. And let's face it... flying elixirs at 3rd level is very useful.
Elixirs don't require concentration or miscibility rolls so they're good as a stacked buff. An alchemist who picks up bless via magic initiate grants 2-8 attack bonus and 2-8 saving throw bonus at 3rd level before replicating magic items. That's pretty good, tbh. What's also useful is the ability to brew potions at half time. Common and uncommon potions (and scrolls from the Cartographer) can be quickly produced during downtime. Wands, armor, and weapons from other artificers not so much.
Alchemical savant is better than arcane firearm. That static bonus is more reliable and adds to both damage and healing while arcane firearm only adds to damage. And even though it's unlikely to see 20th level+ play the fact that the INT bonus can reach +10 (30 INT) eventually is a better damage bonus too. Hitting 2-3 targets with acid splash for 4d6+5 each, or single target fire bolt for 4d10+5+2d8, isn't the worst damage. With the extra accuracy bonus from the boldness elixir firebolt becomes competitive with a warlock using eldritch blast and agonizing blast. I think the bonus to each eldritch blast still favors the warlock, however; especially under the max 30 INT premise.
The temp hp elixirs grant from the fortify portion of restorative reagents is very good because those temp hp added the artificer's level to them. At 9th level that healing elixir gives ~14hp of healing and 14 temp hp additionally. That eventually becomes 25 temp hp (30 temp hp eventually under the 30 INT premise) with every elixir and 5 free elixirs is already 125 temp hp (also up to 150 temp hp) to apply. Free lesser restoration castings isn't bad either.
A free casting of Tasha's bubbling cauldron isn't actually that powerful but it does add some utility benefits or healing.
There are definitely advantages to playing an alchemist. The drawback is they need to use spell slots to leverage their action economy more than artillerists or battle smiths do.
Under the UA changes, all artificers can use homunculi to increase their damage too. Homunculi take no actions to command. Using my alchemist example, that would be the cantrip damage, the homunculus bonus attack, and sustained damage with the bonus action from something like heat metal or flaming sphere.
Not as bad as some of y'all thing. ;-)
I am pretty sure Elixirs are supposed to trigger Miscibility and as an Alchemist main I wish they'd give us more options for potions or elixirs overall. In AD&D Alchemist had access to all spells up to level 6 as potions and in 3.5 they had access to all touch or self-targeting spells up to level six. I want that versatility back so bad.
There's nothing to indicate that alchemist elixirs trigger miscibility. I think that's the point of not calling them potions. More elixir options would definitely be nice but the more options become available the more random it becomes. I recommend 6 or 8 options with 2 pips on the die that allows a choice. Going beyond that would have me giving up on the random roll completely, especially since I know lot of people already don't like it.
We're not playing AD&D or 3.5 anymore and a lot is different when it comes to spell casting in general. A few more elixirs and a bonus cantrip known seems more in line with 5e to me.
Artillerists I feel are pretty well off but agree with everyone else in asking for more spell slots. I also feel like for Artificers spells should be something infused into items rather than directly cast in order to avoid some niche environmental circumstances such as wild magic or anti-magic spheres. For the Artillerists I think it would be cool if they could also create wands like an Alchemist does with their elixirs giving them the option to cast or infuse a stick with a spell, they can shoot at someone.
Artillerist do create a wand. Arcane firearm is a rod, staff, or wand. Their crafting times on wands is halved compared to everyone else. Common wands suck so they're looking at uncommon wands for their downtime.
An artillerist can make a wand of fireballs in 25 days instead of the 50 days other crafters would take, which means they could just craft 2 such wands in the same time. An alchemist can craft rare potions twice as fast as an artillerist can craft rare wands, but I think this is a losing point for alchemists because of the single use for the investment. OTOH, uncommon wands are already available to all artificers in the replicate items and an alchemist can make 8 uncommon potions faster than an artillerist can make a rare wand. There are some decent uncommon potions without the delay to have them.
I think the idea is that characters will be using crafting rules with artificers. Martial classes crafting potions and other spellcasters crafting scrolls is also likely because the investment to do so and downtime required are low regardless. A battle master fighter, for example, gets a free artisan tool proficiency that can be used on alchemist's supplies and craft a healing potion in a day of downtime or uncommon potions in a week of downtime. That's not bad for a little benefit.
Battlesmith needs the most work over all out of the class. The pet isn't great and it doesn't really feel like a smith for battle. I'd rather they gave then the most Magic Plans so they could craft the most enchanted gear. Maybe don't give them any more Attunement slots to balance it. Then they'd feel like a solid smith for the party.
The battle smith is probably the best and most straight forward subclass.
Steel defenders add proficiency bonus to all ability checks they make. That's much better than something like the bard's jack of all trades ability that only adds half proficiency to ability checks associated with skills. They create an extra target that can possibly absorb some attacks and damage. They can take the help action to give advantage on checks out of combat, but since the steel defender has a proficiency bonus to those checks it's often better to get the defender to perform the check while the battle smith helps. Steel defenders are an excellent use of a bonus action, and can provide bonus damage or bonus healing. 5hp+5hp/lvl is better than a wizard or sorcerer without a CON bonus and almost the same as most character classes without a CON bonus.
Proficiency with martial weapons being added to medium armor and shield training already and extra attack makes a decent enough base to add the defender.
I think we do overrate the battle smith, but it's definitely functional.
I wouldn't add bonus attunement. I think that steps on armorer a bit. But I would remind you that they craft ordinary or magical weapons in half the time. 25 days of downtime for vicious weapons is definitely worthwhile. Crafting days don't need to be consecutive. The crafter just needs to be able to work on the item during that time so with money and time these guys can outfit the party with decent weapons aside from their replicated magic items.
Armorer is great. No complaints and it feels like the subclass the class was designed around in 5e/One.
Armorer works, but "I use super magic armor" isn't a trope I find that appealing but there are some interesting options in there and this subclass does seem to fit the artificer concept.
The crafting benefits are subsumed within the replicate magic item options so the crafting portion isn't terribly exciting.
Cartographer, again, is nearly prefect. They just need to make it a bit more leaned towards stealth by making their Faerie Fire invisible and the like.
The cartographer is mostly minor teleportation, a bonus to initiative, bonus faerie fire spells, and the ability to target without line of sight. That all seems hella useful to me, tbh, but a person taking that option is giving up attack and defensive power compared to other artificer options for tactical movement. I need to play with this more.
Invisible faerie fire seems counter-intuitive, lol. ;-)
Armorer is good aside from the scaling on the built in weapons. They either need to explicitly be allowed to use infusion to improve those weapons (since RAW it appears they cannot) or those weapons need to scale better. As-is they are useful for the first few levels but are quickly overshadowed by magical gear the rest of the party is picking up. However if they were a full caster, then as their built in weapons start getting left behind, their spellcasting would be picking up and they could transition from a front liner with some spell support to a Gish.
Battlesmith is probably the best balanced, but still the damage scaling on the steel defender is rather poor. That poor scaling would not be a problem if the Battlesmith were capable of tossing out bigger and better spells and was mostly relying on the steel defender to... well... defend him as a front or midline caster with martial competency.
Artillerist's biggest problem is the limit on the number of cannons they get per day. If they were a full caster, that limit would no longer be an issue as they could reserve their cannons for big fights and usually rely on spellcasting to get things done.
Alchemist does okay with a very limited subset of spells but they have so few spell slots that they are eventually relying on cantrip damage most of the time. Yeah, with one specific cantrip, they are capable of decent damage, but they lack the versatility of a full caster currently and don't really have anything to show for it. They bring less to the party than pretty much any full caster does. If they WERE full casters I think they would be fine, but a bit underwhelming.
And Cartographer. Their mobility shenanigans are nice, but not amazing. Compared to Fey Pact Warlocks they are WAY less powerful. Most of what they do is extremely situational. Where a Fey Pact Warlock gets to teleport pretty freely and gets bonus damage or effects when they do so, then aside from the movement 'port Cartographer only teleports in certain circumstances and gets no additional effects for doing so. Mostly the Cartographer would be indispensable during a heist, but otherwise, kind of just a half caster with additional mobility and little else to bring to the table. As a full caster they would still be underwhelming but not completely overshadowed.
The question I ask is, if the Artificer were a full caster, would it be overpowered? And I am pretty sure the answer is no. The Warlock's invocations are roughly equivalent in utility to Artificer infusions. An argument could be made that the Warlock is not a full caster either, but they are much more similar to a full caster than a half caster. They have similar spell power progression even though it works very differently and they don't multiclass as cleanly. I think it is entirely fair to compare the Fey Pact Warlock to the Cartographer Artificer and it is NOT favorable for the Cartographer.
If they want to stick with the Artificer being a half caster, then I feel that the core mechanics of the class (infusions) and the capabilities of some of the subclasses need to be improved.
I've learned to live within the number of Artificer spell slots but what I think is much more limiting in the UA and 2024 in general is the fewer prepared spells. I really really like having tactical choices when I start the day not knowing what my combat will be. The difference in the early levels between having 2 prepared spells and 4/5 is tremendous. I assume this was done to be "less confusing" and intentionally to create fewer options for new players, but in my opinion having a few more options really helped me learn the class and the spells. I learn better by playing them than by reading them. If someone only wants to learn 1-2 spells and use the same ones all the time, the extra options don't hurt them.
Artillerist spends slots creating more cannons to last the day while elixirs are like free random bonus spells that can be used on a bonus action and last all day. People seem to look at the artillerist like the free cannons last the adventuring day whey they don't. The elixir choices are also a lot like having 5 more spells known to cast. And let's face it... flying elixirs at 3rd level is very useful.
Elixirs don't require concentration or miscibility rolls so they're good as a stacked buff. An alchemist who picks up bless via magic initiate grants 2-8 attack bonus and 2-8 saving throw bonus at 3rd level before replicating magic items. That's pretty good, tbh. What's also useful is the ability to brew potions at half time. Common and uncommon potions (and scrolls from the Cartographer) can be quickly produced during downtime. Wands, armor, and weapons from other artificers not so much.
Alchemical savant is better than arcane firearm. That static bonus is more reliable and adds to both damage and healing while arcane firearm only adds to damage. And even though it's unlikely to see 20th level+ play the fact that the INT bonus can reach +10 (30 INT) eventually is a better damage bonus too. Hitting 2-3 targets with acid splash for 4d6+5 each, or single target fire bolt for 4d10+5+2d8, isn't the worst damage. With the extra accuracy bonus from the boldness elixir firebolt becomes competitive with a warlock using eldritch blast and agonizing blast. I think the bonus to each eldritch blast still favors the warlock, however; especially under the max 30 INT premise.
The temp hp elixirs grant from the fortify portion of restorative reagents is very good because those temp hp added the artificer's level to them. At 9th level that healing elixir gives ~14hp of healing and 14 temp hp additionally. That eventually becomes 25 temp hp (30 temp hp eventually under the 30 INT premise) with every elixir and 5 free elixirs is already 125 temp hp (also up to 150 temp hp) to apply. Free lesser restoration castings isn't bad either.
A free casting of Tasha's bubbling cauldron isn't actually that powerful but it does add some utility benefits or healing.
There are definitely advantages to playing an alchemist. The drawback is they need to use spell slots to leverage their action economy more than artillerists or battle smiths do.
Under the UA changes, all artificers can use homunculi to increase their damage too. Homunculi take no actions to command. Using my alchemist example, that would be the cantrip damage, the homunculus bonus attack, and sustained damage with the bonus action from something like heat metal or flaming sphere.
Not as bad as some of y'all thing. ;-)
I am pretty sure Elixirs are supposed to trigger Miscibility and as an Alchemist main I wish they'd give us more options for potions or elixirs overall. In AD&D Alchemist had access to all spells up to level 6 as potions and in 3.5 they had access to all touch or self-targeting spells up to level six. I want that versatility back so bad.
There's nothing to indicate that alchemist elixirs trigger miscibility. I think that's the point of not calling them potions. More elixir options would definitely be nice but the more options become available the more random it becomes. I recommend 6 or 8 options with 2 pips on the die that allows a choice. Going beyond that would have me giving up on the random roll completely, especially since I know lot of people already don't like it.
We're not playing AD&D or 3.5 anymore and a lot is different when it comes to spell casting in general. A few more elixirs and a bonus cantrip known seems more in line with 5e to me.
Artillerists I feel are pretty well off but agree with everyone else in asking for more spell slots. I also feel like for Artificers spells should be something infused into items rather than directly cast in order to avoid some niche environmental circumstances such as wild magic or anti-magic spheres. For the Artillerists I think it would be cool if they could also create wands like an Alchemist does with their elixirs giving them the option to cast or infuse a stick with a spell, they can shoot at someone.
Artillerist do create a wand. Arcane firearm is a rod, staff, or wand. Their crafting times on wands is halved compared to everyone else. Common wands suck so they're looking at uncommon wands for their downtime.
An artillerist can make a wand of fireballs in 25 days instead of the 50 days other crafters would take, which means they could just craft 2 such wands in the same time. An alchemist can craft rare potions twice as fast as an artillerist can craft rare wands, but I think this is a losing point for alchemists because of the single use for the investment. OTOH, uncommon wands are already available to all artificers in the replicate items and an alchemist can make 8 uncommon potions faster than an artillerist can make a rare wand. There are some decent uncommon potions without the delay to have them.
I think the idea is that characters will be using crafting rules with artificers. Martial classes crafting potions and other spellcasters crafting scrolls is also likely because the investment to do so and downtime required are low regardless. A battle master fighter, for example, gets a free artisan tool proficiency that can be used on alchemist's supplies and craft a healing potion in a day of downtime or uncommon potions in a week of downtime. That's not bad for a little benefit.
Battlesmith needs the most work over all out of the class. The pet isn't great and it doesn't really feel like a smith for battle. I'd rather they gave then the most Magic Plans so they could craft the most enchanted gear. Maybe don't give them any more Attunement slots to balance it. Then they'd feel like a solid smith for the party.
The battle smith is probably the best and most straight forward subclass.
Steel defenders add proficiency bonus to all ability checks they make. That's much better than something like the bard's jack of all trades ability that only adds half proficiency to ability checks associated with skills. They create an extra target that can possibly absorb some attacks and damage. They can take the help action to give advantage on checks out of combat, but since the steel defender has a proficiency bonus to those checks it's often better to get the defender to perform the check while the battle smith helps. Steel defenders are an excellent use of a bonus action, and can provide bonus damage or bonus healing. 5hp+5hp/lvl is better than a wizard or sorcerer without a CON bonus and almost the same as most character classes without a CON bonus.
Proficiency with martial weapons being added to medium armor and shield training already and extra attack makes a decent enough base to add the defender.
I think we do overrate the battle smith, but it's definitely functional.
I wouldn't add bonus attunement. I think that steps on armorer a bit. But I would remind you that they craft ordinary or magical weapons in half the time. 25 days of downtime for vicious weapons is definitely worthwhile. Crafting days don't need to be consecutive. The crafter just needs to be able to work on the item during that time so with money and time these guys can outfit the party with decent weapons aside from their replicated magic items.
Armorer is great. No complaints and it feels like the subclass the class was designed around in 5e/One.
Armorer works, but "I use super magic armor" isn't a trope I find that appealing but there are some interesting options in there and this subclass does seem to fit the artificer concept.
The crafting benefits are subsumed within the replicate magic item options so the crafting portion isn't terribly exciting.
Cartographer, again, is nearly prefect. They just need to make it a bit more leaned towards stealth by making their Faerie Fire invisible and the like.
The cartographer is mostly minor teleportation, a bonus to initiative, bonus faerie fire spells, and the ability to target without line of sight. That all seems hella useful to me, tbh, but a person taking that option is giving up attack and defensive power compared to other artificer options for tactical movement. I need to play with this more.
Invisible faerie fire seems counter-intuitive, lol. ;-)
Alchemist - Elixirs mimic potions, but your correct, it does not explicitly read anywhere that they negate the Miscibility of potions. They may want to fine tune that wording to give us clarification or its going to be a debate. If elixirs do not have Miscibility then the table could be expanded to include things like Grease or Snare or Detect Magic and the like. If not and even better still would be to just give Alchemist the ability to convert spells into potions which would be susceptible to Miscibility.
The 5e "chaotic" roll for it elixirs table never made sense to me. Alchemist were the most lawful of Wizards having fine-tuned spell crafting into potions, then they did the same through D&D science later on which is again is pretty rigid. Making them chaotic in 5e thematically makes them feel like really bad Alchemist. Like they don't know what they are brewing opposed to all earlier edition Alchemist? At least that is the feeling the mechanics provide and that is my complaint. The 5e Alchemist was kind of incompetent as an Alchemist compared to other editions. The Blue Beetle of Alchemist. I mean I'm still playing it but it could be revised to be much better in my humble opinion as an Alchemist main.
Artillerist - I hear you on the wands but that isn't really what I meant. Again, it is about building a feeling through the class mechanics and I think they missed the mark by having Artificers play like Wizards and other spell casters. They should be preparing all their spells as items during their long rest which can be handed out to the party or used by them. So, what I intended here was the Artillerist should be able to have 8 or 9 wands which they can use themselves or give to others. Keep the Arcane Firearm but also give them a less powerful less augmentable way to make wands to channel their spells without requiring them to cast so as to avoid Wild Magic. Anyone can create a Wand of Fireballs shaving off time isn't that impressive when they could be made to be more versatile while playing up their niche as indirect spellcasters.
Battlesmith - You are the only person I have seen talk up this subclass. The pet has zero options opposed to the Druid and Ranger pets. Casting through it is meh there are other ways to accomplish that. Battlesmith would be way cooler if they had way more Magic Plans than the rest of the subclasses. They wouldn't need more Attunement slots but rather just the ability to craft more magical items on the fly for the party as a whole. That feels mechanically like a smith. The current class feels mechanically like a rigger and not a smith.
Armorer - Same. We're in complete agreement but it is the best put together subclass. The mechanics feel like the description of the subclass too. It was well put together from the start.
Cartographer - I am super excited to see where this goes. It is almost as solid as the Armorer in that the mechanics feel like stuff a cartographer or someone that is adept at magically mapping and detecting stuff remotely would do. I get that invisible Faerie Fire is counter intuitive but it isn't going to be used in the same way as it normally would. The way the designed the subclass the spell is going to be used as a static radar ping in a spot. So, like lets say you want to block off/guard a passage just in case someone is coming up behind you as your scouting. Cast Faerie Fire and you'll be notified when it triggers like Alarm. Making it invisible like Alarm would give the Cartographer the ability to sneak away or plot an ambush gaining the additional benefits of Faerie Fire during the attack without the target even realizing it. This also allows the class to fit extremely well with a rogue as well as the scribes wizard since one could enhance the stealth and the other scouting.
Personally, I'd prefer for Elixirs to follow the same miscibility rules as potions.
Mixing potions and/or elixirs can then become a minigame that the alchemist can play every long rest. Most of the effects on that table are good, and the most common result (55%) is consolidating two potion effects down to a single mixture. So long as you mix those potions in a bottle before hand, as opposed to mixing them in your stomach by drinking two in quick succession, you can now get two effects for the price of 1 bonus action.
The issue then is just being able to survive the 1% chance of explosion, and being able to identify the mixture's effects before drinking to avoid the danger of the 7% chance it becomes a poison.
Beyond that a DM would have to rule on other situations, like whether or not a mixture of an Elixir and a Potion would cause a roll on the table, and whether or not that mixture would persist when the Elixir vanishes at the end of a long rest, etc.
Im surprised some of yall think cartographer is fine.
As far as casting without sight, first there is a question about what needing a 'clear path' means for spells, but even beyond that, they have very few spells/effects that target allies via sight
far as i can see, you got spare the dying, healing word, enlarge reduce, levitate, and haste. of those its unlikely you would need to do haste or enlarge reduce from cover. Levitate is actually bad for certain allies in most situations as it limits movement.
faerie fire is not actually a great baseline usecase option, because it uses concentration, consumes an action, may miss, only is a good cast if you have many attackers with no source of advantage, and only gives 3-5 uses.(which is likely 3-10 monsters attemped per day) Hunters mark might give 3-5 uses, but that lasts you a whole day, and adds its bonus in all situations. It also does not scale as well as it needs to. And there is no unique benefit to a cartographer doing it versus anyone else. If other classes dont think casting faerie fire is a good idea, why would it be good for the artificer to do it?
what is the point of movement if you are not effective? people used to say the 2014 monk was great because it had movement, but there is no point in movement unless you can do something useful by using it. Is movement improving the catigrapher's dpr, support, or anything else? if not, it serves no purpose.
As far as scouting, What about cartographer makes it better or even just unique at scouting/reconnasaince than other people?
now, i wouldnt expect most of yall to do a number analysis, but i will tell you the dpr potential of cartographer is some of the lowest ive seen in 2024, if thats the case, it needs to be bringing more (or similar but unique) to the table outside of dpr than other classes. What has this subclass got vs alchemist, druid, bard, or cleric?
what is the cartographer doing in or out of combat most of the time when it plays?
i think the idea can work, but it isnt close to where it needs to be yet. it needs either a baseline utility on par with other half casters, or tons of versatility and enough resources to be good throught the day like casters.
its not perfect, it needs a way for its armor to be better than it is, and its special weapons to interact better with magic replication, or it needs to have a way to use other weapons fairly easily before lvl 10.
its not horrible by any stretch, but its currently hard to justify not being a BS for that gameplay. in my tests, the Battlesmith/fighter1 was basically just as good as the armorer, if not better.
the armorer was at least able to use enspelled items to get decent BA usage that the BS would rather use a steel defender,, but the BA options are now a lot lower.
I tend to agree that Cartographer doesn't have a lot they can do personally to make great use of their excellent mobility.
However, one notable aspect of the maps is they they enable ALL map holders to ignore the sight restriction on targeting other map holders, not just the Cartographer. The Cartographer's maps enable other support casters to be better at their roles as well. The Cartographer's role then seems to be less direct support themselves and more support enabling.
A neat concept that occurred to me about the Cartographer was "What if you could plant a map on an enemy?" in theory you or an ally could then use it's line-of-sight bypass against the target offensively. So that could be an interesting thing the Cartographer could seek to use their movement to do in combat. Currently, the closest you get to that is by marking creatures with either faerie fire or guiding bolt.
Unfortunately, the current wording doesn't really work with using the Adventurer's Atlas offensively... You touch N creatures at the end of a long rest to grant each of them a map, it implies that the map only works on those creatures, not something you can trade freely with, or plant on other creatures.
I feel like the Cartographer could use more sabotage spells/abilities. The base artificer spell list has a few of those spells, but they also mostly conflict with concentration restrictions.
https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/ua/eberron-updates/Lhg25Ggx5iY3rETH/UA2025-CartographerArtificer.pdf
It's not available in the character builder, if that's what you're asking, because it's a pre-release version for playtesting. D&D Beyond's character builder only supports fully published content.
You can always find the latest pre-release playtest stuff by going to the Sources menu at the top of the site and selecting "Unearthed Arcana".
pronouns: he/she/they
I found it I was not talking about character builder but I found it.
Cartographer in depth:
Base DPR: 1-4: cantrip damage, (likely true strike d8 weapon) approximate= 4.875(lvl1-3) 5.25(lvl 4)
Base DPR; 5: cantrip damage (7.8)+ Homunculus force strike(3.57). approx 11.37
Base DPR 6-8: cantrip damage (7.8)+ Homunculus force strike(3.57) and magic missle(10.5)(6 rounds) approx 14 dpr
Base DPR 9-12: cantrip damage(8.45) +haste attack(6.17) (2 combats) +homunculus force strike and magic missle(avg 6.17)(6rounds) approx (lvl9-10)17.71dpr (lvl 11-12) 20dpr
Base DPR 13 cantrip damage(10.75)+precast Summon construct(16.25)(1 combat) haste attack (6.17)(3 combats) +homunculus(6.17); approx 25.61
Base DPR 14 cantrip damage(15.25)flametngue+ precast summon construct(16.25) 1/4 haste attack 3/4(10.7) +homunculus(9.35)fireball: approx 36
Base DPR 15-16: . . 1 more summon construct. approx 38dpr
Base dpr 17+ 1 animate objects approx 42.65
19
there may be more optimized paths, and at certain point you may get more value giving a martial a flame tongue or +2 weapon over magic missile, but thats roughly your dpr expectation. artificer baseline doesnt have any notable lvl 3 or lower damage spells, so spell storage item wont be used for damage.
for reference
https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/russcantrell/viz/DDDPSDashboard/DDDPSDashboard
and i think i use a higher assumed accuracy(65%) than treantmonk(most of the source for builds) this basically means its the lowest dpr subclass/class in the game.
this assumes 4 four round encounters a day, with you using replicates, and doing damage related actions and spells.
Defenses:
17 ac base 19 with armor. with replicate: 19/21 HP d8 growth. self defensive spells blur, blink, stoneskin, circle of power. Mostly average defsively. can slightly boost their defense or an ally via replicate, if they dont already have magic items.
support abilities
Atlas: +2.5 avg initiative
Atlas: member awareness GPS
Atlas: Cast sight based targted spells on allies as long as they are in range.
ingenious: Move self/allies who fail save/ability rolls
Atlas+: teleport and stabilized downed map holders.
extra casts of faerie fire
and various spells, but as far as a support spell list, its fairly lackluster, and its ahalf caster, so they get these support spells later than other classes, and can cast them less often.
it can support somewhat via replicate items, mostly to bolster defenses, and rarely utility. while they can change an item once per day, they dont have many more plans than replicates.
artificer spells that work with atlas; (that you can cast without seeing)
healing word, enlarge reduce, haste, spare the dying, levitate
item/ability effects that work with atlas:
bandore instrument(levitate), flash of genius, helm of teleportation
other abilities of note:
micro teleports, at the cost of movement, most likely used to disengage, or get through small areas. but they also have a further teleport.
lvl 15 concentration cant be broken by damage. seems great, but artificer is already fairly resistant to losing concentration, cartographer is less likely to be up close, and their concentration list is not mind blowing. As a half caster they get spells later as well.
best uses at 15+ is circle of power, bigby's or animate objects. though animate objects is more likely to die than you lose concentration.
Sub Class concept/fantasy (according to video and my own perspective)
A supportive based scout with strong movement and map awareness.
to be continued
I'll say it again, if Artificer was a full caster, it would still not be amazing, but would be at least not terrible. As a half caster, the non-casting class features need more oomph. The loss of enspelled items hits this class hard, but ultimately that build, while the only one that allowed it to keep pace with other classes, was not very flavorful and apparently counter to intentions.
If they are dedicated to the Artificer being a half caster, they need to give it more to work with. If they made it a full caster then I think all the subclasses aside from Alchemist and Cartographer are then reasonable. Alchemist would need a bit of a boost and Cartographer would need more of one, but all of them would be far more attractive and competitive with other classes with far less tweaking.
I think that, even has a half-caster, the Artillerist, Armorer and Battlesmith are ok, assuming you make good use of your magic items, since at least they have weapon-based combat and other subclass features to use that don't depend entirely on your limited spellcasting.
But yeah, the Alchemist and the new Cartographer...Both have subclass features that enhance spellcasting in a way that becomes kinda useless. They both force you to pick certain types of spells to make use of them: The Alchemist assumes you're going to be casting spells dealing specific damage types and the Cartographer assumes you're going to be casting buff spells on your allies. But with limited spells of the 'right' kind and limited slots, you're going to run out of fuel pretty quick. After the first or second encounter of the day you're basically going to be casting cantrips and hiding.
Considering there’s barely any leveled damage spells on the core Artificer list- and the ones that are there are nearly all covered- and there’s exactly one damage cantrip from the list that you’re actually likely to use on what is clearly a blaster build that isn’t affected by the 5th level feature, the subclass is hardly being all that proscribed from their actual class options.
Artillerist spends slots creating more cannons to last the day while elixirs are like free random bonus spells that can be used on a bonus action and last all day. People seem to look at the artillerist like the free cannons last the adventuring day whey they don't. The elixir choices are also a lot like having 5 more spells known to cast. And let's face it... flying elixirs at 3rd level is very useful.
Elixirs don't require concentration or miscibility rolls so they're good as a stacked buff. An alchemist who picks up bless via magic initiate grants 2-8 attack bonus and 2-8 saving throw bonus at 3rd level before replicating magic items. That's pretty good, tbh. What's also useful is the ability to brew potions at half time. Common and uncommon potions (and scrolls from the Cartographer) can be quickly produced during downtime. Wands, armor, and weapons from other artificers not so much.
Alchemical savant is better than arcane firearm. That static bonus is more reliable and adds to both damage and healing while arcane firearm only adds to damage. And even though it's unlikely to see 20th level+ play the fact that the INT bonus can reach +10 (30 INT) eventually is a better damage bonus too. Hitting 2-3 targets with acid splash for 4d6+5 each, or single target fire bolt for 4d10+5+2d8, isn't the worst damage. With the extra accuracy bonus from the boldness elixir firebolt becomes competitive with a warlock using eldritch blast and agonizing blast. I think the bonus to each eldritch blast still favors the warlock, however; especially under the max 30 INT premise.
The temp hp elixirs grant from the fortify portion of restorative reagents is very good because those temp hp added the artificer's level to them. At 9th level that healing elixir gives ~14hp of healing and 14 temp hp additionally. That eventually becomes 25 temp hp (30 temp hp eventually under the 30 INT premise) with every elixir and 5 free elixirs is already 125 temp hp (also up to 150 temp hp) to apply. Free lesser restoration castings isn't bad either.
A free casting of Tasha's bubbling cauldron isn't actually that powerful but it does add some utility benefits or healing.
There are definitely advantages to playing an alchemist. The drawback is they need to use spell slots to leverage their action economy more than artillerists or battle smiths do.
Under the UA changes, all artificers can use homunculi to increase their damage too. Homunculi take no actions to command. Using my alchemist example, that would be the cantrip damage, the homunculus bonus attack, and sustained damage with the bonus action from something like heat metal or flaming sphere.
Not as bad as some of y'all thing. ;-)
It seems to be a common sentiment that Artificers need more spell slots than half-casters get.
It may show my age, but does anyone else remember the 3/4 caster that was a bard? Spells topped out at 6th level, spell advancement was faster than half, slower than full.
not so much artificers overall need more spell slots, just the alchemist and cartographer, And its tight for artillerists early on since eldritch cannon uses slots, bur eventually thats not a huge deal.
I am pretty sure Elixirs are supposed to trigger Miscibility and as an Alchemist main I wish they'd give us more options for potions or elixirs overall. In AD&D Alchemist had access to all spells up to level 6 as potions and in 3.5 they had access to all touch or self-targeting spells up to level six. I want that versatility back so bad.
Artillerists I feel are pretty well off but agree with everyone else in asking for more spell slots. I also feel like for Artificers spells should be something infused into items rather than directly cast in order to avoid some niche environmental circumstances such as wild magic or anti-magic spheres. For the Artillerists I think it would be cool if they could also create wands like an Alchemist does with their elixirs giving them the option to cast or infuse a stick with a spell, they can shoot at someone.
Battlesmith needs the most work over all out of the class. The pet isn't great and it doesn't really feel like a smith for battle. I'd rather they gave then the most Magic Plans so they could craft the most enchanted gear. Maybe don't give them any more Attunement slots to balance it. Then they'd feel like a solid smith for the party.
Armorer is great. No complaints and it feels like the subclass the class was designed around in 5e/One.
Cartographer, again, is nearly prefect. They just need to make it a bit more leaned towards stealth by making their Faerie Fire invisible and the like.
"Life is Cast by Random Dice"
Burn my candle twice.
I have done my life justice
Against random dice.
Unfortunately, they cannot directly add more spell slots without interfering with Multiclassing spellcasting progression.
How to add Tooltips.
There's nothing to indicate that alchemist elixirs trigger miscibility. I think that's the point of not calling them potions. More elixir options would definitely be nice but the more options become available the more random it becomes. I recommend 6 or 8 options with 2 pips on the die that allows a choice. Going beyond that would have me giving up on the random roll completely, especially since I know lot of people already don't like it.
We're not playing AD&D or 3.5 anymore and a lot is different when it comes to spell casting in general. A few more elixirs and a bonus cantrip known seems more in line with 5e to me.
Artillerist do create a wand. Arcane firearm is a rod, staff, or wand. Their crafting times on wands is halved compared to everyone else. Common wands suck so they're looking at uncommon wands for their downtime.
An artillerist can make a wand of fireballs in 25 days instead of the 50 days other crafters would take, which means they could just craft 2 such wands in the same time. An alchemist can craft rare potions twice as fast as an artillerist can craft rare wands, but I think this is a losing point for alchemists because of the single use for the investment. OTOH, uncommon wands are already available to all artificers in the replicate items and an alchemist can make 8 uncommon potions faster than an artillerist can make a rare wand. There are some decent uncommon potions without the delay to have them.
I think the idea is that characters will be using crafting rules with artificers. Martial classes crafting potions and other spellcasters crafting scrolls is also likely because the investment to do so and downtime required are low regardless. A battle master fighter, for example, gets a free artisan tool proficiency that can be used on alchemist's supplies and craft a healing potion in a day of downtime or uncommon potions in a week of downtime. That's not bad for a little benefit.
The battle smith is probably the best and most straight forward subclass.
Steel defenders add proficiency bonus to all ability checks they make. That's much better than something like the bard's jack of all trades ability that only adds half proficiency to ability checks associated with skills. They create an extra target that can possibly absorb some attacks and damage. They can take the help action to give advantage on checks out of combat, but since the steel defender has a proficiency bonus to those checks it's often better to get the defender to perform the check while the battle smith helps. Steel defenders are an excellent use of a bonus action, and can provide bonus damage or bonus healing. 5hp+5hp/lvl is better than a wizard or sorcerer without a CON bonus and almost the same as most character classes without a CON bonus.
Proficiency with martial weapons being added to medium armor and shield training already and extra attack makes a decent enough base to add the defender.
I think we do overrate the battle smith, but it's definitely functional.
I wouldn't add bonus attunement. I think that steps on armorer a bit. But I would remind you that they craft ordinary or magical weapons in half the time. 25 days of downtime for vicious weapons is definitely worthwhile. Crafting days don't need to be consecutive. The crafter just needs to be able to work on the item during that time so with money and time these guys can outfit the party with decent weapons aside from their replicated magic items.
Armorer works, but "I use super magic armor" isn't a trope I find that appealing but there are some interesting options in there and this subclass does seem to fit the artificer concept.
The crafting benefits are subsumed within the replicate magic item options so the crafting portion isn't terribly exciting.
The cartographer is mostly minor teleportation, a bonus to initiative, bonus faerie fire spells, and the ability to target without line of sight. That all seems hella useful to me, tbh, but a person taking that option is giving up attack and defensive power compared to other artificer options for tactical movement. I need to play with this more.
Invisible faerie fire seems counter-intuitive, lol. ;-)
Armorer is good aside from the scaling on the built in weapons. They either need to explicitly be allowed to use infusion to improve those weapons (since RAW it appears they cannot) or those weapons need to scale better. As-is they are useful for the first few levels but are quickly overshadowed by magical gear the rest of the party is picking up. However if they were a full caster, then as their built in weapons start getting left behind, their spellcasting would be picking up and they could transition from a front liner with some spell support to a Gish.
Battlesmith is probably the best balanced, but still the damage scaling on the steel defender is rather poor. That poor scaling would not be a problem if the Battlesmith were capable of tossing out bigger and better spells and was mostly relying on the steel defender to... well... defend him as a front or midline caster with martial competency.
Artillerist's biggest problem is the limit on the number of cannons they get per day. If they were a full caster, that limit would no longer be an issue as they could reserve their cannons for big fights and usually rely on spellcasting to get things done.
Alchemist does okay with a very limited subset of spells but they have so few spell slots that they are eventually relying on cantrip damage most of the time. Yeah, with one specific cantrip, they are capable of decent damage, but they lack the versatility of a full caster currently and don't really have anything to show for it. They bring less to the party than pretty much any full caster does. If they WERE full casters I think they would be fine, but a bit underwhelming.
And Cartographer. Their mobility shenanigans are nice, but not amazing. Compared to Fey Pact Warlocks they are WAY less powerful. Most of what they do is extremely situational. Where a Fey Pact Warlock gets to teleport pretty freely and gets bonus damage or effects when they do so, then aside from the movement 'port Cartographer only teleports in certain circumstances and gets no additional effects for doing so. Mostly the Cartographer would be indispensable during a heist, but otherwise, kind of just a half caster with additional mobility and little else to bring to the table. As a full caster they would still be underwhelming but not completely overshadowed.
The question I ask is, if the Artificer were a full caster, would it be overpowered? And I am pretty sure the answer is no. The Warlock's invocations are roughly equivalent in utility to Artificer infusions. An argument could be made that the Warlock is not a full caster either, but they are much more similar to a full caster than a half caster. They have similar spell power progression even though it works very differently and they don't multiclass as cleanly. I think it is entirely fair to compare the Fey Pact Warlock to the Cartographer Artificer and it is NOT favorable for the Cartographer.
If they want to stick with the Artificer being a half caster, then I feel that the core mechanics of the class (infusions) and the capabilities of some of the subclasses need to be improved.
I've learned to live within the number of Artificer spell slots but what I think is much more limiting in the UA and 2024 in general is the fewer prepared spells. I really really like having tactical choices when I start the day not knowing what my combat will be. The difference in the early levels between having 2 prepared spells and 4/5 is tremendous. I assume this was done to be "less confusing" and intentionally to create fewer options for new players, but in my opinion having a few more options really helped me learn the class and the spells. I learn better by playing them than by reading them. If someone only wants to learn 1-2 spells and use the same ones all the time, the extra options don't hurt them.
Alchemist - Elixirs mimic potions, but your correct, it does not explicitly read anywhere that they negate the Miscibility of potions. They may want to fine tune that wording to give us clarification or its going to be a debate. If elixirs do not have Miscibility then the table could be expanded to include things like Grease or Snare or Detect Magic and the like. If not and even better still would be to just give Alchemist the ability to convert spells into potions which would be susceptible to Miscibility.
The 5e "chaotic" roll for it elixirs table never made sense to me. Alchemist were the most lawful of Wizards having fine-tuned spell crafting into potions, then they did the same through D&D science later on which is again is pretty rigid. Making them chaotic in 5e thematically makes them feel like really bad Alchemist. Like they don't know what they are brewing opposed to all earlier edition Alchemist? At least that is the feeling the mechanics provide and that is my complaint. The 5e Alchemist was kind of incompetent as an Alchemist compared to other editions. The Blue Beetle of Alchemist. I mean I'm still playing it but it could be revised to be much better in my humble opinion as an Alchemist main.
Artillerist - I hear you on the wands but that isn't really what I meant. Again, it is about building a feeling through the class mechanics and I think they missed the mark by having Artificers play like Wizards and other spell casters. They should be preparing all their spells as items during their long rest which can be handed out to the party or used by them. So, what I intended here was the Artillerist should be able to have 8 or 9 wands which they can use themselves or give to others. Keep the Arcane Firearm but also give them a less powerful less augmentable way to make wands to channel their spells without requiring them to cast so as to avoid Wild Magic. Anyone can create a Wand of Fireballs shaving off time isn't that impressive when they could be made to be more versatile while playing up their niche as indirect spellcasters.
Battlesmith - You are the only person I have seen talk up this subclass. The pet has zero options opposed to the Druid and Ranger pets. Casting through it is meh there are other ways to accomplish that. Battlesmith would be way cooler if they had way more Magic Plans than the rest of the subclasses. They wouldn't need more Attunement slots but rather just the ability to craft more magical items on the fly for the party as a whole. That feels mechanically like a smith. The current class feels mechanically like a rigger and not a smith.
Armorer - Same. We're in complete agreement but it is the best put together subclass. The mechanics feel like the description of the subclass too. It was well put together from the start.
Cartographer - I am super excited to see where this goes. It is almost as solid as the Armorer in that the mechanics feel like stuff a cartographer or someone that is adept at magically mapping and detecting stuff remotely would do. I get that invisible Faerie Fire is counter intuitive but it isn't going to be used in the same way as it normally would. The way the designed the subclass the spell is going to be used as a static radar ping in a spot. So, like lets say you want to block off/guard a passage just in case someone is coming up behind you as your scouting. Cast Faerie Fire and you'll be notified when it triggers like Alarm. Making it invisible like Alarm would give the Cartographer the ability to sneak away or plot an ambush gaining the additional benefits of Faerie Fire during the attack without the target even realizing it. This also allows the class to fit extremely well with a rogue as well as the scribes wizard since one could enhance the stealth and the other scouting.
"Life is Cast by Random Dice"
Burn my candle twice.
I have done my life justice
Against random dice.
Personally, I'd prefer for Elixirs to follow the same miscibility rules as potions.
Mixing potions and/or elixirs can then become a minigame that the alchemist can play every long rest. Most of the effects on that table are good, and the most common result (55%) is consolidating two potion effects down to a single mixture. So long as you mix those potions in a bottle before hand, as opposed to mixing them in your stomach by drinking two in quick succession, you can now get two effects for the price of 1 bonus action.
The issue then is just being able to survive the 1% chance of explosion, and being able to identify the mixture's effects before drinking to avoid the danger of the 7% chance it becomes a poison.
Beyond that a DM would have to rule on other situations, like whether or not a mixture of an Elixir and a Potion would cause a roll on the table, and whether or not that mixture would persist when the Elixir vanishes at the end of a long rest, etc.
Im surprised some of yall think cartographer is fine.
As far as casting without sight, first there is a question about what needing a 'clear path' means for spells, but even beyond that, they have very few spells/effects that target allies via sight
far as i can see, you got spare the dying, healing word, enlarge reduce, levitate, and haste. of those its unlikely you would need to do haste or enlarge reduce from cover. Levitate is actually bad for certain allies in most situations as it limits movement.
faerie fire is not actually a great baseline usecase option, because it uses concentration, consumes an action, may miss, only is a good cast if you have many attackers with no source of advantage, and only gives 3-5 uses.(which is likely 3-10 monsters attemped per day) Hunters mark might give 3-5 uses, but that lasts you a whole day, and adds its bonus in all situations. It also does not scale as well as it needs to. And there is no unique benefit to a cartographer doing it versus anyone else. If other classes dont think casting faerie fire is a good idea, why would it be good for the artificer to do it?
what is the point of movement if you are not effective? people used to say the 2014 monk was great because it had movement, but there is no point in movement unless you can do something useful by using it. Is movement improving the catigrapher's dpr, support, or anything else? if not, it serves no purpose.
As far as scouting, What about cartographer makes it better or even just unique at scouting/reconnasaince than other people?
now, i wouldnt expect most of yall to do a number analysis, but i will tell you the dpr potential of cartographer is some of the lowest ive seen in 2024, if thats the case, it needs to be bringing more (or similar but unique) to the table outside of dpr than other classes. What has this subclass got vs alchemist, druid, bard, or cleric?
what is the cartographer doing in or out of combat most of the time when it plays?
i think the idea can work, but it isnt close to where it needs to be yet. it needs either a baseline utility on par with other half casters, or tons of versatility and enough resources to be good throught the day like casters.
also re:armorer.
its not perfect, it needs a way for its armor to be better than it is, and its special weapons to interact better with magic replication, or it needs to have a way to use other weapons fairly easily before lvl 10.
its not horrible by any stretch, but its currently hard to justify not being a BS for that gameplay. in my tests, the Battlesmith/fighter1 was basically just as good as the armorer, if not better.
the armorer was at least able to use enspelled items to get decent BA usage that the BS would rather use a steel defender,, but the BA options are now a lot lower.
I tend to agree that Cartographer doesn't have a lot they can do personally to make great use of their excellent mobility.
However, one notable aspect of the maps is they they enable ALL map holders to ignore the sight restriction on targeting other map holders, not just the Cartographer. The Cartographer's maps enable other support casters to be better at their roles as well. The Cartographer's role then seems to be less direct support themselves and more support enabling.
A neat concept that occurred to me about the Cartographer was "What if you could plant a map on an enemy?" in theory you or an ally could then use it's line-of-sight bypass against the target offensively. So that could be an interesting thing the Cartographer could seek to use their movement to do in combat. Currently, the closest you get to that is by marking creatures with either faerie fire or guiding bolt.
Unfortunately, the current wording doesn't really work with using the Adventurer's Atlas offensively... You touch N creatures at the end of a long rest to grant each of them a map, it implies that the map only works on those creatures, not something you can trade freely with, or plant on other creatures.
I feel like the Cartographer could use more sabotage spells/abilities. The base artificer spell list has a few of those spells, but they also mostly conflict with concentration restrictions.