Artificers in my mind actually should have the option to feel like a powerhouse on the battle field, if they choose to focus on improving their weapons and using buff spells on themselves, like arcane weapon. I dont like the idea of them just being a "support wizard", who can't deal direct damage to save their lives. They should be a class with options to fit into a party dynamic, not just subscribe to being a support or damage class. Their subclasses reflect that for me too. I see alchemist as being useful for the support artificers, making healing potions and being able to restore allies, (homonculous i did not like much because it felt too devoted to being damage dealing with a bit of support, but I would be happy with it as an infusion, or if it was more useful for supporting allies). I would personally like it if they had an ability similar to the alchemists satchel, but about creating potions to replicate low level spell effects (like an INT modifier cure wounds per long rest, or casting cantrips as a bonus action as spells from the satchel). But whatever they end up being I will most likely be fine with. To me, artillerists are the "mad inventors", crafting crazy dangerous inventions to destroy their enemies in the battle field. They get huge, explosive spells, mostly AOE, and their turrets help them become a force on the battlefield. Their wands I honestly do not dislike, but I wish they had not been flavored as wands, instead being flavored as inventions of any kind you have created to replicate a cantrip, such as a wand or a slingshot, or something. Battle Smith is an artificer that, like the artillerist, works well on the battle field, but they are more support based. They are good fighters, using INT instead of STR or DEX, but they can choose whether or not to be a great fighter themselves, or to buff their allies. Their spells are mostly buff-based (you can flavor smites to be a temporary buff of the weapon). The only gripe i have about them is their 6th level ability. I love the iron defender at level 3, and its 14th level ability makes sense (defensive pounce dealing damage specifically), but the 6th level ability just does not feel like you get to use it enough to be useful. It kinda just feels like a weaker, less useful version of the turrets. I kinda wish it had been something like making any weapon you hold considered magic while you hold it, or advantage against losing concentration on your artificer spells. But idk, it still is a cool subclass.
ACTUALLY, I JUST REALIZED. In 1 round, a 20th level +5 INT battle mage with a heavy crossbow, arcane weapon, repeating shot, and iron defender, can deal, using Arcane Jolt and Defensive Pounce, assuming all attacks hit, 2d10+10+2+2d6+1d8+6+4d4+1d4+5. Or 58 damage on average. TBF not all of this is ranged, but still. (The earliest level you would be able to use this at is 14th level). You would only be able to do this 5 times per long rest tho. Without Arcane Jolt, you would deal 48 damage on average. This is still assuming that all attacks hit tho. If Arcane Weapon scaled, that would be 86 damage, 76 without Arcane Jolt. With crossbow expert and hand crossbows, this would actually be lower, at 46.5.
I'd remind to only discuss "OP" in the context of comparison. EG everything you described is also possible as a Human Ranger taking same feats and using Hunter's Mark. The only difference would be Archery giving +2 hit vs +1 weapons for Artificer (note that benefit could be wiped out if the DM grants a +1 crossbow by level 6). Plus a ranger could use Hunter Colossus Slayer to go above the Artificer.
So Arcane Weapon is not OP it is a normal balance point for anyone going combat and is what I would call "Average High tier" where Colossus Slayer is "High High tier." (and the high tier level is only driven by the power feats not the Arcane weapon)
On new spells I have given it a bit of thought and I think is a Main lack of the class so far, I really hope WotC got that from the feedback surveys. I can only come up with the following categories for Artificer specific spells: Traps/Turrets (ala Blade Barrier) Enchants (ala Arcane weapon or other spells connected to weapons) Potions/Poisons (spell damage that works off your ranged attack roll)
What about spells that heal damaged objects, Constructs and structures? We have a huge number of spells that heal creatures, but not many that deal with directly repairing damage to objects and such.
Mending. And Fabricate/Creation, if your DM allows it. Object HP does not come up very often, and such, not much of the game revolves around it.
Honestly I don't really see the need for more artificer specific spells. I guess a couple more would be nice but most of the things I can imagine an artificer doing are already a spell on the spell list. Most of what you describe is already a spell there. But I might just not be imagining right. Perhaps a cantrip that can deal 1d8 of any damage, you choosing the type of damage before you attack with it? And thats like Improvised Chemical? Or a 5th level spell with a range of self that lets you have 2 extra limbs, to hold weapons in? But idk. Honestly i want to see some more infusions, because they feel more like artifice to me than the current spells.
I mean what are you thinking of when you think of healing. I am imagining stuff like fixing a broken sail, or shattered window, or fixing the beams on a boat.
The problem is that sharpshooter and crossbow expert are advanced abilities of the character. Now I maybe wrong, but I don't remember any magic item that simulate the abilities of these 2 feats.
Honestly I don't really see the need for more artificer specific spells. I guess a couple more would be nice but most of the things I can imagine an artificer doing are already a spell on the spell list. Most of what you describe is already a spell there. But I might just not be imagining right. Perhaps a cantrip that can deal 1d8 of any damage, you choosing the type of damage before you attack with it? And thats like Improvised Chemical? Or a 5th level spell with a range of self that lets you have 2 extra limbs, to hold weapons in? But idk. Honestly i want to see some more infusions, because they feel more like artifice to me than the current spells.
I'd like to see other existing spells added to the artificer's list (ie. Booming Blade, Green-Flame Blade).
As for new spells, I'd like to see a preservation spell to preserve components. A spellto create small, portable extra-dimensioal pockets, etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Watch your back, conserve your ammo, and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
Arcane weapon is fine honestly. It is a good way for a class that is pretty brittle to gain some power in their attacks. And it is versatile enough to be used on multiple enemies, changing the type of damage each time. Its honestly just an extra 1d6 damage, for a spell slot (something artificers do not have many of), requiring concentration (which can be broken). And automatically making a weapon magical, something the artificer can do without spending a spell slot at 2nd level anyways. The only thing it is OP against is in comparison to Elemental Weapon, in which case, yeah its more powerful. Remember, you can use elemental weapon for a different person but arcane weapon only for yourself but yeah it is still better. But honestly? Elemental weapon just sucks. Arcane weapon is not game breaking.
The second one is literally an infusion (replicate magic item bag of holding), the first one ehhhh idk that sounds like it is going to either be useless or OP
As far as an object healing spell goes, Mending has two, possibly three limitations. Firstly, it takes an entire minute to cast. Second, it repairs breaks/tears that are no longer than 1 foot in any dimension (also note the wording limits it to breaks and tears while not addressing things like burns, melting, etc). Lastly, though it says it can be used to repair objects and constructs, it gives no numeric value for restoring hp. While this arguably does leave some discretion to the DM, that's still a lot of blank space to fill.
And as far as having more unique spells, most classes have a number that are normally available only to them, excepting the sorcerer which seems to only have one from Xanathar's Guide (Chaos Bolt) which is a shame. Seeing as this is the case, I think it only makes sense that the Artificer have a few that only they normally have available. A dedicated "healing" spell that only affects objects/constructs would be a good suggestion thematic to the class. I myself have toyed around with homebrewing one I call Deconstruction, which effectively works a bit like a reverse Fabricate while also dealing damage to constructs. With a little thinking, I'm sure there's more that could be come up with as well.
The problem is that sharpshooter and crossbow expert are advanced abilities of the character. Now I maybe wrong, but I don't remember any magic item that simulate the abilities of these 2 feats.
Yup the general rule in official and homebrew is not to replicate feats in features or spells or directly in items, if one person spends a ASI to get GWM while the other person just lucks into it, the first person starts feeling cheated.
I agree they shouldn’t have Infusions like that, instead look for rules people dislike and make Infusions to fix that part: don’t like encumbrance? everyone gets a bag of holding, Don/doff heavy armor takes 10 minutes? Not any more it is now Stark tech Ironman 2 armor.
Honestly I don't really see the need for more artificer specific spells. I guess a couple more would be nice but most of the things I can imagine an artificer doing are already a spell on the spell list. Most of what you describe is already a spell there. But I might just not be imagining right. Perhaps a cantrip that can deal 1d8 of any damage, you choosing the type of damage before you attack with it? And thats like Improvised Chemical? Or a 5th level spell with a range of self that lets you have 2 extra limbs, to hold weapons in? But idk. Honestly i want to see some more infusions, because they feel more like artifice to me than the current spells.
I would say that the unique aspects of any caster’s spell list really help cement their differences. What is a paladin without Smite spells and Auras? Just a Cleric with a Weapon.
It is the key reason people still call Artificer Spellcasting just Wizard. If it had heavy Construct specialty, Trap like spells (I don’t like Glyph of warding in execution much) and enchant like spells. That wizards could not cast, then no one would have any doubt when they first saw him casting.
What you are talking about is what the subclasses are. Or spells that already exist. Want a trap? Snare. Turrets? Artillerist. Construct? Battle Smith. Potions? Alchemist. What a subclass is for the artificer is, when you consider their spells and inventions to be the same, basically an extra spell, or series of extra spells. Infusions fill in the gap of inventions, and honestly, the infusions only being built to counteract rules that people don't like would not work. If they don't like playing with those rules, no one said they had to, unless you are playing in AL. Don't want encumbrance? Don't have it in your game. Artificers SHOULD feel like a wizard casting, (albeit with less spell slots or amount of spells). They are doing pretty much the exact same thing as a wizard, but through items instead. If it was not for Artificer already being a class in previous editions, it would be a wizard subclass. They will probably have a couple extra spells for the artificer, but the idea that they need new spells to feel unique is completely ridiculous. The artificer is not designed as a spellcaster, they are designed as an item user/creator who knows some spells. Infusions are what makes the artificer unique. I agree that there should be an artificer spell to heal objects better tho, that makes sense to me.
I feel you are thinking of the artificer as a class that is centered around casting spells. That is not what it is. It is similar to the ranger or paladin, as half casters who use spells to enhance their abilities. However, it is using arcane magic to enhance their abilities. They do get cantrips, because they are supposed to be more magical than the paladin or ranger. The artificer is supposed to use magic items in combat (if you are focusing on fighting), or utility items outside of it (if you are focused on utility). Arcane weapon exists to allow the artificer to feel this niche filled at the expense of one of their spell slots. Infusions are supposed to be add-ons to this, allowing the artificer to have more magic items for either them or the party to use.
I'm sorry Crawling. Sometimes I have difficulty putting my thoughts into words so I do it multiple times. I did not mean to seem aggressive. I hope I did not discourage you by talking too much too intensely. Honestly I agree with some of your ideas, like the object healing spell.
What you are talking about is what the subclasses are. Or spells that already exist. Want a trap? Snare. Turrets? Artillerist. Construct? Battle Smith. Potions? Alchemist. What a subclass is for the artificer is, when you consider their spells and inventions to be the same, basically an extra spell, or series of extra spells. Infusions fill in the gap of inventions, and honestly, the infusions only being built to counteract rules that people don't like would not work. If they don't like playing with those rules, no one said they had to, unless you are playing in AL. Don't want encumbrance? Don't have it in your game. Artificers SHOULD feel like a wizard casting, (albeit with less spell slots or amount of spells). They are doing pretty much the exact same thing as a wizard, but through items instead. If it was not for Artificer already being a class in previous editions, it would be a wizard subclass. They will probably have a couple extra spells for the artificer, but the idea that they need new spells to feel unique is completely ridiculous. The artificer is not designed as a spellcaster, they are designed as an item user/creator who knows some spells. Infusions are what makes the artificer unique. I agree that there should be an artificer spell to heal objects better tho, that makes sense to me.
To each their own but I still think this is a little too restrictive. Subclasses are a once per campaign decision while spells are at least every level and prepared is every long rest decisions.
Further a lot of homebrewers put a lot of work into carefully hand crafting spell lists to give more personality to their class. For example if you gave warlock the full wizard spell list something would be lost even though the mechanics would remain unchanged. All the Eldritch horror spells on necrotic cold and tentacles help reinforce the base even before subclass choice.
Subclass choice can refine an aspect of this core but if it just isn’t there that isn’t enough to have one or two features. Again I reinforce the example of Paladin, if it was just exactly the Cleric spell list with Spiritual weapon and no Aura spells there would be much less personality to the spell choice of playing Paladin. Even before accounting for your subclass choice.
And finally the spells specifically crafted for a half caster tend to be on a higher power curve as only they and Bards get those spells. (I’d say 120% of a normal spell rather than over the top) Remember a bard effectively gives up a class feature (or subclass feature of which they don’t get much) to just learn spells, its okay if they are a bit more powerful, as it still has to be thematic to choose them.
eg. Aura of life per spellslot is one of the best heals and Swift quiver is basically a double haste for an archer (and you can still get extra hasted by someone else)
Artificer is not the wizard spell list, and paladin without smites and auras is not the cleric spell list. Artificer is a strange combination of spells. They have damaging cantrips, and yet no directly damaging spells of 1st level or above (some spells that deal damage indirectly, such as arcane weapon, but no fireballs or ice knives or anything like that). They are an arcane caster, and yet they get healing spells. They receive pretty much all the utility spells in the game, and are an arcane caster who has a spell preparation mechanic instead of a spells known mechanic, the only one of its kind in the game (not counting wizard, but artificer does not need a spellbook, they know all their 1st level spells at 1st level, and so on). They have ridiculous utility with their spells, better than the wizard, because that is what their spell list is supposed to be. Arcane Weapon is one of the best weapon enchantment spells in the game. Honestly, I really like the artificer spell list.
Fair enough spell choice selection want fairly good for Artifice in the healing and utility department. Personally I am no longer a fan of Arcane and Divine split, there is nearly nothing left that distinguishes the two categories besides perhaps “appears on Wizard’s list or not.”
Let’s see how the release goes in the next few days, personally I don’t foresee many spells anyway since it’s not that kind of book. But I still see it as only a benefit the more unique spells the can come up with for the Artificer.
Yeah more spells would be cool, i can agree with that. I feel that divine magic and arcane magic do have a difference in feel to them, but artificer seems to be blurring the lines a bit.
Artificers in my mind actually should have the option to feel like a powerhouse on the battle field, if they choose to focus on improving their weapons and using buff spells on themselves, like arcane weapon. I dont like the idea of them just being a "support wizard", who can't deal direct damage to save their lives. They should be a class with options to fit into a party dynamic, not just subscribe to being a support or damage class. Their subclasses reflect that for me too. I see alchemist as being useful for the support artificers, making healing potions and being able to restore allies, (homonculous i did not like much because it felt too devoted to being damage dealing with a bit of support, but I would be happy with it as an infusion, or if it was more useful for supporting allies). I would personally like it if they had an ability similar to the alchemists satchel, but about creating potions to replicate low level spell effects (like an INT modifier cure wounds per long rest, or casting cantrips as a bonus action as spells from the satchel). But whatever they end up being I will most likely be fine with. To me, artillerists are the "mad inventors", crafting crazy dangerous inventions to destroy their enemies in the battle field. They get huge, explosive spells, mostly AOE, and their turrets help them become a force on the battlefield. Their wands I honestly do not dislike, but I wish they had not been flavored as wands, instead being flavored as inventions of any kind you have created to replicate a cantrip, such as a wand or a slingshot, or something. Battle Smith is an artificer that, like the artillerist, works well on the battle field, but they are more support based. They are good fighters, using INT instead of STR or DEX, but they can choose whether or not to be a great fighter themselves, or to buff their allies. Their spells are mostly buff-based (you can flavor smites to be a temporary buff of the weapon). The only gripe i have about them is their 6th level ability. I love the iron defender at level 3, and its 14th level ability makes sense (defensive pounce dealing damage specifically), but the 6th level ability just does not feel like you get to use it enough to be useful. It kinda just feels like a weaker, less useful version of the turrets. I kinda wish it had been something like making any weapon you hold considered magic while you hold it, or advantage against losing concentration on your artificer spells. But idk, it still is a cool subclass.
ACTUALLY, I JUST REALIZED. In 1 round, a 20th level +5 INT battle mage with a heavy crossbow, arcane weapon, repeating shot, and iron defender, can deal, using Arcane Jolt and Defensive Pounce, assuming all attacks hit, 2d10+10+2+2d6+1d8+6+4d4+1d4+5. Or 58 damage on average. TBF not all of this is ranged, but still. (The earliest level you would be able to use this at is 14th level). You would only be able to do this 5 times per long rest tho. Without Arcane Jolt, you would deal 48 damage on average. This is still assuming that all attacks hit tho. If Arcane Weapon scaled, that would be 86 damage, 76 without Arcane Jolt. With crossbow expert and hand crossbows, this would actually be lower, at 46.5.
.
Mending. And Fabricate/Creation, if your DM allows it. Object HP does not come up very often, and such, not much of the game revolves around it.
Honestly I don't really see the need for more artificer specific spells. I guess a couple more would be nice but most of the things I can imagine an artificer doing are already a spell on the spell list. Most of what you describe is already a spell there. But I might just not be imagining right. Perhaps a cantrip that can deal 1d8 of any damage, you choosing the type of damage before you attack with it? And thats like Improvised Chemical? Or a 5th level spell with a range of self that lets you have 2 extra limbs, to hold weapons in? But idk. Honestly i want to see some more infusions, because they feel more like artifice to me than the current spells.
I mean what are you thinking of when you think of healing. I am imagining stuff like fixing a broken sail, or shattered window, or fixing the beams on a boat.
The problem is that sharpshooter and crossbow expert are advanced abilities of the character. Now I maybe wrong, but I don't remember any magic item that simulate the abilities of these 2 feats.
I'd like to see other existing spells added to the artificer's list (ie. Booming Blade, Green-Flame Blade).
As for new spells, I'd like to see a preservation spell to preserve components. A spellto create small, portable extra-dimensioal pockets, etc.
Watch your back, conserve your ammo,
and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
Arcane weapon is fine honestly. It is a good way for a class that is pretty brittle to gain some power in their attacks. And it is versatile enough to be used on multiple enemies, changing the type of damage each time. Its honestly just an extra 1d6 damage, for a spell slot (something artificers do not have many of), requiring concentration (which can be broken). And automatically making a weapon magical, something the artificer can do without spending a spell slot at 2nd level anyways. The only thing it is OP against is in comparison to Elemental Weapon, in which case, yeah its more powerful. Remember, you can use elemental weapon for a different person but arcane weapon only for yourself but yeah it is still better. But honestly? Elemental weapon just sucks. Arcane weapon is not game breaking.
The second one is literally an infusion (replicate magic item bag of holding), the first one ehhhh idk that sounds like it is going to either be useless or OP
As far as an object healing spell goes, Mending has two, possibly three limitations. Firstly, it takes an entire minute to cast. Second, it repairs breaks/tears that are no longer than 1 foot in any dimension (also note the wording limits it to breaks and tears while not addressing things like burns, melting, etc). Lastly, though it says it can be used to repair objects and constructs, it gives no numeric value for restoring hp. While this arguably does leave some discretion to the DM, that's still a lot of blank space to fill.
And as far as having more unique spells, most classes have a number that are normally available only to them, excepting the sorcerer which seems to only have one from Xanathar's Guide (Chaos Bolt) which is a shame. Seeing as this is the case, I think it only makes sense that the Artificer have a few that only they normally have available. A dedicated "healing" spell that only affects objects/constructs would be a good suggestion thematic to the class. I myself have toyed around with homebrewing one I call Deconstruction, which effectively works a bit like a reverse Fabricate while also dealing damage to constructs. With a little thinking, I'm sure there's more that could be come up with as well.
Yup the general rule in official and homebrew is not to replicate feats in features or spells or directly in items, if one person spends a ASI to get GWM while the other person just lucks into it, the first person starts feeling cheated.
I agree they shouldn’t have Infusions like that, instead look for rules people dislike and make Infusions to fix that part: don’t like encumbrance? everyone gets a bag of holding, Don/doff heavy armor takes 10 minutes? Not any more it is now Stark tech Ironman 2 armor.
I would say that the unique aspects of any caster’s spell list really help cement their differences. What is a paladin without Smite spells and Auras? Just a Cleric with a Weapon.
It is the key reason people still call Artificer Spellcasting just Wizard. If it had heavy Construct specialty, Trap like spells (I don’t like Glyph of warding in execution much) and enchant like spells. That wizards could not cast, then no one would have any doubt when they first saw him casting.
What you are talking about is what the subclasses are. Or spells that already exist. Want a trap? Snare. Turrets? Artillerist. Construct? Battle Smith. Potions? Alchemist. What a subclass is for the artificer is, when you consider their spells and inventions to be the same, basically an extra spell, or series of extra spells. Infusions fill in the gap of inventions, and honestly, the infusions only being built to counteract rules that people don't like would not work. If they don't like playing with those rules, no one said they had to, unless you are playing in AL. Don't want encumbrance? Don't have it in your game. Artificers SHOULD feel like a wizard casting, (albeit with less spell slots or amount of spells). They are doing pretty much the exact same thing as a wizard, but through items instead. If it was not for Artificer already being a class in previous editions, it would be a wizard subclass. They will probably have a couple extra spells for the artificer, but the idea that they need new spells to feel unique is completely ridiculous. The artificer is not designed as a spellcaster, they are designed as an item user/creator who knows some spells. Infusions are what makes the artificer unique. I agree that there should be an artificer spell to heal objects better tho, that makes sense to me.
I feel you are thinking of the artificer as a class that is centered around casting spells. That is not what it is. It is similar to the ranger or paladin, as half casters who use spells to enhance their abilities. However, it is using arcane magic to enhance their abilities. They do get cantrips, because they are supposed to be more magical than the paladin or ranger. The artificer is supposed to use magic items in combat (if you are focusing on fighting), or utility items outside of it (if you are focused on utility). Arcane weapon exists to allow the artificer to feel this niche filled at the expense of one of their spell slots. Infusions are supposed to be add-ons to this, allowing the artificer to have more magic items for either them or the party to use.
I'm sorry Crawling. Sometimes I have difficulty putting my thoughts into words so I do it multiple times. I did not mean to seem aggressive. I hope I did not discourage you by talking too much too intensely. Honestly I agree with some of your ideas, like the object healing spell.
To each their own but I still think this is a little too restrictive. Subclasses are a once per campaign decision while spells are at least every level and prepared is every long rest decisions.
Further a lot of homebrewers put a lot of work into carefully hand crafting spell lists to give more personality to their class. For example if you gave warlock the full wizard spell list something would be lost even though the mechanics would remain unchanged. All the Eldritch horror spells on necrotic cold and tentacles help reinforce the base even before subclass choice.
Subclass choice can refine an aspect of this core but if it just isn’t there that isn’t enough to have one or two features. Again I reinforce the example of Paladin, if it was just exactly the Cleric spell list with Spiritual weapon and no Aura spells there would be much less personality to the spell choice of playing Paladin. Even before accounting for your subclass choice.
And finally the spells specifically crafted for a half caster tend to be on a higher power curve as only they and Bards get those spells. (I’d say 120% of a normal spell rather than over the top) Remember a bard effectively gives up a class feature (or subclass feature of which they don’t get much) to just learn spells, its okay if they are a bit more powerful, as it still has to be thematic to choose them.
eg. Aura of life per spellslot is one of the best heals and Swift quiver is basically a double haste for an archer (and you can still get extra hasted by someone else)
Artificer is not the wizard spell list, and paladin without smites and auras is not the cleric spell list. Artificer is a strange combination of spells. They have damaging cantrips, and yet no directly damaging spells of 1st level or above (some spells that deal damage indirectly, such as arcane weapon, but no fireballs or ice knives or anything like that). They are an arcane caster, and yet they get healing spells. They receive pretty much all the utility spells in the game, and are an arcane caster who has a spell preparation mechanic instead of a spells known mechanic, the only one of its kind in the game (not counting wizard, but artificer does not need a spellbook, they know all their 1st level spells at 1st level, and so on). They have ridiculous utility with their spells, better than the wizard, because that is what their spell list is supposed to be. Arcane Weapon is one of the best weapon enchantment spells in the game. Honestly, I really like the artificer spell list.
Fair enough spell choice selection want fairly good for Artifice in the healing and utility department. Personally I am no longer a fan of Arcane and Divine split, there is nearly nothing left that distinguishes the two categories besides perhaps “appears on Wizard’s list or not.”
Let’s see how the release goes in the next few days, personally I don’t foresee many spells anyway since it’s not that kind of book. But I still see it as only a benefit the more unique spells the can come up with for the Artificer.
Yeah more spells would be cool, i can agree with that. I feel that divine magic and arcane magic do have a difference in feel to them, but artificer seems to be blurring the lines a bit.
As was Bard previously. My main differential was prepared vs spells known at least for full casters, but now the half casters blur all those lines.