"Overall, the Artificer rebuild/revisit completely guts the foundation of what an Artificer is; someone who is a craftsman, an inventor."
The magic of artifice sidebar explains that your spellcasting is done via invention, which is why you need tools to cast spells. In this way, your somatic and material components are geared more toward using an item you created during spell preparation to create the spell effect. This is also why artificers can change their cantrips on a long rest and later a short rest. This method of spellcasting can be however you imagine the effect being created from an item.
This also goes toward your comment of "The Alchemist isn't about spells!!!! They are about creating alchemical formulas that aid them and others!!!"
Correct! And if you cast your spells with alchemist supplies as the focus, you can flavor your spells as an effect that is produced from a concoction you have made and takes on a certain effect when the right verbal components are used. In this way, you can still play the alchemist the way the old one was built, but you have to use your imagination.
"The only thing in the entire Artificer class that has to do with building permanent magic items, is in the Artillerist subclass."
The creation of permanent magic items already exists within the rules in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. Each of the subclasses makes you better at crafting a particular type of magic item than non Artificers.
"To top things off, it has been over 30 days and a survey to offer feedback still has yet to be posted to the D&D website."
"The magic of artifice sidebar explains that your spellcasting is done via invention, which is why you need tools to cast spells. In this way, your somatic and material components are geared more toward using an item you created during spell preparation to create the spell effect. This is also why artificers can change their cantrips on a long rest and later a short rest. This method of spellcasting can be however you imagine the effect being created from an item."
I am glad that you quoted the Magic of the Artificer sidebar. That is the problem that I am having with pretty much the entire revisit. Instead of coming up with something new like the original Artificer release, they are reskinned a spellcaster and have the players cast spells using artisan's tools or pocket inventions like the Deluminator/ Pu-Outer from the Harry Potter books/movies. The revisited Artificer is all about storytelling and describing how a player casts their spells. At least with the Artificer that was release in January of 2017, the Artificer has the spellcasting capability but that wasn't their "main" purpose. The spellcasting was to support them while they used their Alchemy Bag or Thunder Cannon.
"Correct! And if you cast your spells with alchemist supplies as the focus, you can flavor your spells as an effect that is produced from a concoction you have made and takes on a certain effect when the right verbal components are used. In this way, you can still play the alchemist the way the old one was built, but you have to use your imagination."
Again, the revisited Artificer is just a reskinned spellcaster. You are using storytelling, imagination, and flavor to cast a spell. A person that is already a spellcaster can already do that. I have played with and seen people who's character was a spellcaster and have added imagination and flavor to how they cast spells. Why create a class & subclass (that is supposed to be new and different) that just casts spells in a different way?
"The creation of permanent magic items already exists within the rules in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. Each of the subclasses makes you better at crafting a particular type of magic item than non Artificers."
I agree, XGtE and the DMG has rules that explains the creation of permanent magical items. However, an Artificer, a person who is a craftsman and inventor should be able to create those magical item but at an advantage. While the individual subclasses does provide benefits for crafting potions and wands, the class as a whole fails to address crafting permanent magical items. I am not asking for nor am I expecting the class to be able to craft very rare items at 10th level. The 2017 Artificer allowed the player to craft permanent magical items (even if the list was extremely short and the majority of the items sucked, IMOP).
The 2017 Artificer was something new. It introduced players to a class that specialized in crafting magical items. The new 2019 Artificer, while being able to craft temporary magical items and gave the subclasses a boost in crafting certain types of magical items, they steered it more towards being a spellcaster. That is something I don't want and I am not looking for. And there are many people out there that share the same views.
In the end, both builds are broken. However, instead of fixing and balancing the original, they decided to take the class in a completely different direction and expand upon spellcasting.
Thank you for the YouTube link. I wasn't aware of this video.
While I appreciate the approach stating “just my opinion”, that is the best way to approach forum posts, I still disagree with your conclusions so expand on them, equally just my opinion but hope to sway yours.
Firstly, WoTC have promised a second half of Artificer UA, which will expand at least the Spells list, hopefully including some more Artificer and Alchemist themed spells, and maybe one more Subclass or more magic items for infusion list. There would be no point in releasing the survey before then as they would not get to process that feedback, and maybe it would already address half of peoples’ concerns.
Secondly, I did not clearly see what you thought was Overpowered besides the flexible Cantrips, which I address below. Could you make a list of the things you think are over powered to discuss?
On the flexible Cantrips, I think this is both a cool mechanic and one that has no balance issues, I mean Warlocks can get 7 cantrips with no multiclassing and any multiclassed spellcaster has a plethora of Cantrips. There is no power creep because you still have to choose 1 that you use each turn, I mean it is not like you can enter a combat with firebolt see they have fire resistance and say "Oops give me 1 hour break and we can restart combat, I just need to swap to ray of frost". They are just cantrips nothing impressive. It also fits the restless tinker and flexible caster theme.
On the Tools casting, I think the point is that this flavour IS THE DEFAULT for Artificer, it is not a variant rule it is a sidebar, so you would need a DMs approval to not do this. A DM technically has to approve any of the examples you have above because it messes with worldbuilding. For example a Sorcerer that gains magic from a God of Magic might flavour his focus as a holy symbol but when captured the guards have to be aware this is possible or they might not think to take his holy symbol. So by default the Artificer HAS NO SPELLS he has MECHANICS DICTATED BY SPELLCASTING, but they are not in lore spells. The Alchemist is creating Potions that recreate spelllike effects when thrown.
On Spellcasting: Spellcasting should not only be considered a core feature of a class, but also a Core Pillar of the whole game of DND 5e. I’d say about half of the game is based off spellcasting, both creatures and player characters. It helps people to build transferrable knowledge, learning how spellcasting works once and applying it to every class and even enemies: When the DM says the enemy casts Counterspell everyone understands but if an Artificer had to say “I use my ability Disruption.” “What is that?” “Oh your spell fails.” it is just not neat. Leaning into spellcasting lets you transfer a lot of utility to a class without having to rewrite a lot of it.
We could run the same set of questions on other classes, calling them sloppy: Why do Way of Four Elements monks just recreate a bunch of Spells? Why do Invocations just grant spells not new abilities? Why are Paladin Smites Spells not just more lists at the end of the class? Why do Paladins use Devine Magic if they are not granted by Gods? Why is Hunter’s Mark/Volley/Swift Quiver Spells and not a list at the end of the class? Why do Half casters just get spells and not Unique melee spell like abilities? I am sure there is a mandate to make sure the new classes have the same difficulty and core class building mechanics as the core classes so leaning into spellcasting system helps make the knowledge transferrable.
Overall I hope this helps explain why I think housing more of Artificers abilities into Spellcasting is an okay approach, and I hope you understand why I hate classes and homebrews that in general have huge lists of spelllike options at the end, it is better to house those rules in the Spellcasting section and explain why the class has this ability. Warlocks, Battlemasters and WotFE Monks are enough already and I can see that Psionics and maybe Summoner Evolutions will need it too but I do not see a reason why Artificer should. It does need an expanded list of lower and higher level Wands and Potions, but ones accessible to everyone, with Artificers being the best at making and hence using them.
PS. I think there isn’t that many people calling for less spellcasting more lists as you implied, you are the first one so strongly in this thread. Also I think in 2017 there was a lot of people saying the Alchemy lists didn’t make sense as it should just be a physical list of craftable potions instead. And I am sorry if I misinterpreted any of your arguments, used biased examples or used any antagonizing language, none of which was my intent.
For the record I do agree with most of the other points you brought up regarding Spell storing and crafting real magic items. Although I would probably just add a level 18 feature which let you make one of your Infusions permanent once per month and ability to learn schematics of magic items you have researched. With no fail states but month long craft times (scaled by number of assistants, even non artificers) and full magic item costs, no freebies just different from magic item purchasing.
On a side note I would enjoy if each subclass similar to its spell list also got a Replicate Magic Item list of a few only it can replicate. (only pulling from already written magic items, otherwise again too cumbersome)
Is everyone with a problem with the crafting part of the class NOT talking to their DM? I’ve been able to come up with a revised crafting list for the Alchemist that makes my character a much-valued member of the group. Not only do I bring damage, healing, and control to the table, but the start of trouble usually sees me handing out potions to my group: healing potions, oil of slipperiness, bottled breaths, potion of X resistance. Most of this is made during downtime but there are lots of stretches in a campaign to pull this off AND for one shots it can be assumed you come with some potions pre-loaded.
We tend to craft common to rare items with the rare items requiring a special component (given by the DM) and a lesser version potion used during creation. However, with the time and cost reductions you can, as it reads, get things done a lot quicker than most.
Is everyone with a problem with the crafting part of the class NOT talking to their DM? I’ve been able to come up with a revised crafting list for the Alchemist that makes my character a much-valued member of the group. Not only do I bring damage, healing, and control to the table, but the start of trouble usually sees me handing out potions to my group: healing potions, oil of slipperiness, bottled breaths, potion of X resistance. Most of this is made during downtime but there are lots of stretches in a campaign to pull this off AND for one shots it can be assumed you come with some potions pre-loaded.
We tend to craft common to rare items with the rare items requiring a special component (given by the DM) and a lesser version potion used during creation. However, with the time and cost reductions you can, as it reads, get things done a lot quicker than most.
Most of the complaints I have seen concerning the Artificer, as it stands currently, come from a lack of creativity on the players parts. Not all mind you, but a great deal in my opinion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Watch your back, conserve your ammo, and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
Is everyone with a problem with the crafting part of the class NOT talking to their DM? I’ve been able to come up with a revised crafting list for the Alchemist that makes my character a much-valued member of the group. Not only do I bring damage, healing, and control to the table, but the start of trouble usually sees me handing out potions to my group: healing potions, oil of slipperiness, bottled breaths, potion of X resistance. Most of this is made during downtime but there are lots of stretches in a campaign to pull this off AND for one shots it can be assumed you come with some potions pre-loaded.
We tend to craft common to rare items with the rare items requiring a special component (given by the DM) and a lesser version potion used during creation. However, with the time and cost reductions you can, as it reads, get things done a lot quicker than most.
It's not a matter of talking to the DM, as most DMs usually work with the player to modify the crafting list to give it more value to the player. I just think that instead of creating a list of specific items that the character can only create (as some DMs will not deviate from the list of supplied magic items), that a more generalized wording could be used.
Like, 2nd level Artificers can craft magic items from the common magic item list (XGtE), uncommon items at 5th level, rare items at 10th level, and very rare at 15th level (items chosen to craft would be at the DM's discretion). With crafting times and costs of common through rare are halved, and very rare magic items take the normal amount of time and costs. This method also allows for crafting of custom magical item.
This way the DM can work with the player and tailor the crafting list to fit not only the world/setting they are playing in but also the campaign that the DM created/is creating.
From my point of view... I have to agree about the lack of imagination. Most of the people who have a beef with the class seems to be those who absolutely want precise and concise ruling that are read proof.
While people like that have their own rights. D&d states right from the get go that the books shouldnt be your only sources and that the rules here in shouldnt stop you from playing the way you want.
So yeah, i agree... Lack of imagination is definetely what the haters are all about.
As for being a well needed member of the group in your party... Well, one has to wonder... Why is it so important to you to be able to do everything ? Damage, healing, support... Whats left for the group then if you can do it all ? Thats the only point im worried about. If were giving everything to one class then why are the others necessary ?
Exemple of 3e where a wizard could do it all. So why bother give haste to the fighter when he couldnt fly and follow the dragon ? Why give him fly and haste if he couldnt have an ac of 80 like my wizard could ? Back then wizards were abusive, to the point where they outshined every other classes !
The artificer in 3e was filling a niche that was necessary to fill. It was better then a wizard at boosting others and crafting magical items. That specialisation made him a great asset to a team. Didnt matter that he was not a dps. Didnt matter that he couldnt be a great healer. He was the best support. That was his specialisation.
5e got away from that and decided everyone should be able to be versatile. But that they did wrong. You want to be a dps... Be a paladin with smites ! Up to this point i have seen not much other classes going that far in dps on a single strike. Yes a monk can do 4 attacks at 5th level... But 4 attacks at a d6+5 is nothing compared to 2 attacks at 2d6+5+20. Same with barbarians... Sure they got rage and reckless attacks... But they are nowhere near the damage output of a paladin with smites.
Taking all that in consideration, one has to wonder why is it so necessary that a single class do it all right ?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
On the topic of talking with DM and using imagination, I think I have a different perspective to others as I usually have to search for random games, often not really knowing the DMs and hence it is not a great solution to negotiate all my idiosyncrasies with each new DM. I’d rather play mostly rules as written and never ask for mechanical advantages such as “Can I please craft a potion of fireball as I am a very Alchemist themed Druid...” probably yes but annoying if I try to explain to 5 different DMs.
If it can be made more robust I would be happier with more potions than homebrewing each time as not everyone will be happy to wait while I negotiate something that one helps me.
Arutha, or simply use what we call comunication and ask a single question... ask your DM are you playing RAW, RAI or you homebrew your own stuff and allow imagination to take hold ?
that's what i do when joining a new game. the first thing you do anyway is to set yourself with the DM in any games. so why not start conversing by asking him what kind of liberties you have. i believe you'd be surprised by the number of DMs who would allow you without having to explain a thing. of course if you play adventurers league, they always go for RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
I have a character who is using this Unearthed Arcana, and I'll admit I let him use it without double checking everything. I thought he was pulling my leg with all his abilities even at level 1 so I checked the character. Yesh... It's hard fitting an UA designed for Eberron in a RAW Forgotten Realms quest.
My question is, in the Replicate Magic Item infusion, do you actually need to have a magic item in the table in order to replicate it. I read it as a reverse engineering of a magic item to create another, but it doesn't explicitly say this. Can he just make a bag of holding at level 2 without first having a bag of holding as a template to study?
Replicate Magic Item infusion, do you actually need to have a magic item in the table in order to replicate it. I read it as a reverse engineering of a magic item to create another, but it doesn't explicitly say this. Can he just make a bag of holding at level 2 without first having a bag of holding as a template to study?
As I understand it, each item is an infusion slot. It doesn’t require the item but it *should* require the base thing (cloak, lantern, pouch, etc.). The infusion is the idea of how it operates, so short answer, yes.
A level 2 with a bag of holding isn’t game changing... not nearly as much as a level 4 with a many handed pouch.
Why did you think he was pulling your leg? They get spellcasting and Magical Tinkering, the same amount as a sorcerer or wizard. In fact, sorcerous origins usually give 2 level 1 features, so it's less than a sorcerer. They have a lot of features at higher levels, yeah, but I don't think it's that much of an issue, because that's normal for classes that aren't full casters.
Jumping into the debate over clear rules, I'm Gina have to say that 5e is a great system that has a really upsetting issue with the design philosophy. In trying to give players as much freedom as possible, they seem to give over to being almost uselessly vague in a lot of instances. Being on a strange schedule and without a great internet connection at home, I can't exactly go shopping for new groups or DMs, and the ones I do play with tend to be rules sticklers. It's not derailing to the entire game by any means, but getting a clear answer on my questions is part of the reason I pay like $50 to buy these hardcover rulebooks.
I'd also like more definition and hard thematic elements beyond "oh your tools help you do the magic, make it up on your own". I want the Alchemist to actually do alchemy stuff, not be a pet-based support healer who I have to ~*~imagine~*~ doing alchemy! I want the Artillerist to have its focus on ARTILLERY, not wands that any old spellcaster has. Just give the turret more abilities instead! Stop forcing Eberron flavor into my universal class!
Though, TBF, I honestly don't even think Artificers and Alchemists should be related. I think alchemy and artifice have chemical vs. arcanomechanical trappings and should be separate entities altogether.
The elements are there to account for the alchemy. You can work with your DM to make a better system for you BUT, there is a system in place for you to do more alchemy than other players... and to do it better (one example):
Alchemy Crafting: Takes 1/4 time and 1/2 gold.
Workday: 8hr.
Common: (1 per 2hr. @ 12.5g)
Healing Potion
Any other character is going to spend 8 hours doing what you do in 2, they are going to spend twice the amount of gold, and they are going to have more complications and less successes. Now, that’s just one example out of what amounts to an expanded spell list of potions: Potions of Climbing, Healing, Bottled Breath, Oil of Slipperiness, Potions of Giant Strength, Heroism, Invulnerability, etc. Depending on your downtime/play ratio you could be bringing a lot of support to your group just through potions. (note: Make sure to set up, early on, with your group that you can save them money at least on potions of healing by making them ‘in-house’. I’ve made a lot of coin for crafting without it having to come from my poersonal coffers this way.)
Explan to your DM that it is a staple of your class and see if they can work with you to make it fit their needs, most DMs worth their salt will jump at the chance to homebrew with you.
One other question to ask yourself @Salo, can you really think of at least 10 subclasses for an Alchemist and seperate 10 for Artificer? I mean Alchemist crafts magic potions Artificer crafts magic items, seems correlated?
I do think the subclasses lack a initial feature to help feel more Alchemical/Artillery before jumping straight into the pets etc. For Alchemist I would suggest:
“You have learned to weave your spellcasting into potions. As part of a cast action you can choose to deliver a touch spell or Cantrip via a thrown potion. Make a ranged spell attack using your dexterity modifier, if targeting allies roll against an AC of 10.”
The elements are there to account for the alchemy. You can work with your DM to make a better system for you BUT, there is a system in place for you to do more alchemy than other players... and to do it better (one example):
Alchemy Crafting: Takes 1/4 time and 1/2 gold.
Workday: 8hr.
Common: (1 per 2hr. @ 12.5g)
Healing Potion
Any other character is going to spend 8 hours doing what you do in 2, they are going to spend twice the amount of gold, and they are going to have more complications and less successes. Now, that’s just one example out of what amounts to an expanded spell list of potions: Potions of Climbing, Healing, Bottled Breath, Oil of Slipperiness, Potions of Giant Strength, Heroism, Invulnerability, etc. Depending on your downtime/play ratio you could be bringing a lot of support to your group just through potions. (note: Make sure to set up, early on, with your group that you can save them money at least on potions of healing by making them ‘in-house’. I’ve made a lot of coin for crafting without it having to come from my poersonal coffers this way.)
Explan to your DM that it is a staple of your class and see if they can work with you to make it fit their needs, most DMs worth their salt will jump at the chance to homebrew with you.
This. A thousand times, this! The already existing crafting mechanics seem to be overlooked by far too many people who'd like to have an entire crafting system built directly into the artificer class. There's no need for that due to all the reasons mentioned by Porphy, and even more - one of the artificer ability states:
Tool Expertise
Starting at 3rd level, your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses your proficiency with a tool.
And that means any and all checks you make for any tool whatsoever will be inherently better than any other party member. You are THE crafting hub of your group. You may not have it plainly described step-by-step, but you can do a lot of stuff with that, especially when you realise that "any tool" includes things like: thieves' tools, disguise kit, forgery kit, poisoner's kit etc. so in quite a few situations, you can work with your party's rouge like a dream duo.
Hell, add the fact that you can pick up any tool proficiency (and in your case - instant expertise) via downtime. If I recall, it's 10 - int mod workweeks, and since artificers tend to be intelligent, it's quite a short time (work week = 5 days, 8 hours of work each, so you still have a lot of spare time, and aren't "locked into" training). If your campaign isn't just one, uninterrupted heroic burst of adventures, you'll have plenty of time to pick up a metric ton of expertise and have some creative opportunity for many occasions.
Some people in this thread have already stated the many uses of mundane crafting that you can come up with, and that any DM worth their salt would be positively surprised by. One notable example that stuck to my mind was the use of Cobbler's Tools - possibly one of the most "wtf do I do with that?!" skills in the game, and yet someone came up with taking your party's shoes, and making them much, much more comfortable so that they can travel for longer than normal without suffering exhaustion from forced march. Mundane? Yes. Small bonus? Yes? Useful and creative? Hell yes!
Different opportunity: for jeweler's tools, take the gems and gold you've looted and turn them into fine jewelry (you have expertise, so you should get high results) and sell for much more. Want a use of thieve's tools outside of lockpicking and disarming traps? According to DMG, you can make traps with it, and the DC of said trap is what you roll on your check (and you have expertise).
Sky's the limit, just talk to your DM and the party about letting you "do your job" in any downtime, even if it's just 10 minutes before an incoming battle.
And just remember - you won't (and shouldn't) be "the" solution for every situation, and your crafting shouldn't circumvent the combat, which - unfortunately - many people want. You'll still have your ordinary combat, you'll still have chases, and many other "time's of the essence" situations in which you won't be able to just drop down on your butt and craft your wonders, but that's ok. Use it when it fits, use it creatively, and you'll bring something truly unique to the table without slowing the game to a crawl or forcing it to be about crafting (which not everyone likes).
Damn, it was supposed to just be a support and appreciation for Porphy's post, and here I am, ranting... I'll go away now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Multiclass Warlock enthusiast.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
"The magic of artifice sidebar explains that your spellcasting is done via invention, which is why you need tools to cast spells. In this way, your somatic and material components are geared more toward using an item you created during spell preparation to create the spell effect. This is also why artificers can change their cantrips on a long rest and later a short rest. This method of spellcasting can be however you imagine the effect being created from an item."
I am glad that you quoted the Magic of the Artificer sidebar. That is the problem that I am having with pretty much the entire revisit. Instead of coming up with something new like the original Artificer release, they are reskinned a spellcaster and have the players cast spells using artisan's tools or pocket inventions like the Deluminator/ Pu-Outer from the Harry Potter books/movies. The revisited Artificer is all about storytelling and describing how a player casts their spells. At least with the Artificer that was release in January of 2017, the Artificer has the spellcasting capability but that wasn't their "main" purpose. The spellcasting was to support them while they used their Alchemy Bag or Thunder Cannon.
"Correct! And if you cast your spells with alchemist supplies as the focus, you can flavor your spells as an effect that is produced from a concoction you have made and takes on a certain effect when the right verbal components are used. In this way, you can still play the alchemist the way the old one was built, but you have to use your imagination."
Again, the revisited Artificer is just a reskinned spellcaster. You are using storytelling, imagination, and flavor to cast a spell. A person that is already a spellcaster can already do that. I have played with and seen people who's character was a spellcaster and have added imagination and flavor to how they cast spells. Why create a class & subclass (that is supposed to be new and different) that just casts spells in a different way?
"The creation of permanent magic items already exists within the rules in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. Each of the subclasses makes you better at crafting a particular type of magic item than non Artificers."
I agree, XGtE and the DMG has rules that explains the creation of permanent magical items. However, an Artificer, a person who is a craftsman and inventor should be able to create those magical item but at an advantage. While the individual subclasses does provide benefits for crafting potions and wands, the class as a whole fails to address crafting permanent magical items. I am not asking for nor am I expecting the class to be able to craft very rare items at 10th level. The 2017 Artificer allowed the player to craft permanent magical items (even if the list was extremely short and the majority of the items sucked, IMOP).
The 2017 Artificer was something new. It introduced players to a class that specialized in crafting magical items. The new 2019 Artificer, while being able to craft temporary magical items and gave the subclasses a boost in crafting certain types of magical items, they steered it more towards being a spellcaster. That is something I don't want and I am not looking for. And there are many people out there that share the same views.
In the end, both builds are broken. However, instead of fixing and balancing the original, they decided to take the class in a completely different direction and expand upon spellcasting.
Thank you for the YouTube link. I wasn't aware of this video.
@Marine2874
While I appreciate the approach stating “just my opinion”, that is the best way to approach forum posts, I still disagree with your conclusions so expand on them, equally just my opinion but hope to sway yours.
Firstly, WoTC have promised a second half of Artificer UA, which will expand at least the Spells list, hopefully including some more Artificer and Alchemist themed spells, and maybe one more Subclass or more magic items for infusion list. There would be no point in releasing the survey before then as they would not get to process that feedback, and maybe it would already address half of peoples’ concerns.
Secondly, I did not clearly see what you thought was Overpowered besides the flexible Cantrips, which I address below. Could you make a list of the things you think are over powered to discuss?
On the flexible Cantrips, I think this is both a cool mechanic and one that has no balance issues, I mean Warlocks can get 7 cantrips with no multiclassing and any multiclassed spellcaster has a plethora of Cantrips. There is no power creep because you still have to choose 1 that you use each turn, I mean it is not like you can enter a combat with firebolt see they have fire resistance and say "Oops give me 1 hour break and we can restart combat, I just need to swap to ray of frost". They are just cantrips nothing impressive. It also fits the restless tinker and flexible caster theme.
On the Tools casting, I think the point is that this flavour IS THE DEFAULT for Artificer, it is not a variant rule it is a sidebar, so you would need a DMs approval to not do this. A DM technically has to approve any of the examples you have above because it messes with worldbuilding. For example a Sorcerer that gains magic from a God of Magic might flavour his focus as a holy symbol but when captured the guards have to be aware this is possible or they might not think to take his holy symbol. So by default the Artificer HAS NO SPELLS he has MECHANICS DICTATED BY SPELLCASTING, but they are not in lore spells. The Alchemist is creating Potions that recreate spelllike effects when thrown.
On Spellcasting: Spellcasting should not only be considered a core feature of a class, but also a Core Pillar of the whole game of DND 5e. I’d say about half of the game is based off spellcasting, both creatures and player characters. It helps people to build transferrable knowledge, learning how spellcasting works once and applying it to every class and even enemies: When the DM says the enemy casts Counterspell everyone understands but if an Artificer had to say “I use my ability Disruption.” “What is that?” “Oh your spell fails.” it is just not neat. Leaning into spellcasting lets you transfer a lot of utility to a class without having to rewrite a lot of it.
We could run the same set of questions on other classes, calling them sloppy: Why do Way of Four Elements monks just recreate a bunch of Spells? Why do Invocations just grant spells not new abilities? Why are Paladin Smites Spells not just more lists at the end of the class? Why do Paladins use Devine Magic if they are not granted by Gods? Why is Hunter’s Mark/Volley/Swift Quiver Spells and not a list at the end of the class? Why do Half casters just get spells and not Unique melee spell like abilities? I am sure there is a mandate to make sure the new classes have the same difficulty and core class building mechanics as the core classes so leaning into spellcasting system helps make the knowledge transferrable.
Overall I hope this helps explain why I think housing more of Artificers abilities into Spellcasting is an okay approach, and I hope you understand why I hate classes and homebrews that in general have huge lists of spelllike options at the end, it is better to house those rules in the Spellcasting section and explain why the class has this ability. Warlocks, Battlemasters and WotFE Monks are enough already and I can see that Psionics and maybe Summoner Evolutions will need it too but I do not see a reason why Artificer should. It does need an expanded list of lower and higher level Wands and Potions, but ones accessible to everyone, with Artificers being the best at making and hence using them.
PS. I think there isn’t that many people calling for less spellcasting more lists as you implied, you are the first one so strongly in this thread. Also I think in 2017 there was a lot of people saying the Alchemy lists didn’t make sense as it should just be a physical list of craftable potions instead. And I am sorry if I misinterpreted any of your arguments, used biased examples or used any antagonizing language, none of which was my intent.
For the record I do agree with most of the other points you brought up regarding Spell storing and crafting real magic items. Although I would probably just add a level 18 feature which let you make one of your Infusions permanent once per month and ability to learn schematics of magic items you have researched. With no fail states but month long craft times (scaled by number of assistants, even non artificers) and full magic item costs, no freebies just different from magic item purchasing.
On a side note I would enjoy if each subclass similar to its spell list also got a Replicate Magic Item list of a few only it can replicate. (only pulling from already written magic items, otherwise again too cumbersome)
Is everyone with a problem with the crafting part of the class NOT talking to their DM? I’ve been able to come up with a revised crafting list for the Alchemist that makes my character a much-valued member of the group. Not only do I bring damage, healing, and control to the table, but the start of trouble usually sees me handing out potions to my group: healing potions, oil of slipperiness, bottled breaths, potion of X resistance. Most of this is made during downtime but there are lots of stretches in a campaign to pull this off AND for one shots it can be assumed you come with some potions pre-loaded.
We tend to craft common to rare items with the rare items requiring a special component (given by the DM) and a lesser version potion used during creation. However, with the time and cost reductions you can, as it reads, get things done a lot quicker than most.
Most of the complaints I have seen concerning the Artificer, as it stands currently, come from a lack of creativity on the players parts. Not all mind you, but a great deal in my opinion.
Watch your back, conserve your ammo,
and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
It's not a matter of talking to the DM, as most DMs usually work with the player to modify the crafting list to give it more value to the player. I just think that instead of creating a list of specific items that the character can only create (as some DMs will not deviate from the list of supplied magic items), that a more generalized wording could be used.
Like, 2nd level Artificers can craft magic items from the common magic item list (XGtE), uncommon items at 5th level, rare items at 10th level, and very rare at 15th level (items chosen to craft would be at the DM's discretion). With crafting times and costs of common through rare are halved, and very rare magic items take the normal amount of time and costs. This method also allows for crafting of custom magical item.
This way the DM can work with the player and tailor the crafting list to fit not only the world/setting they are playing in but also the campaign that the DM created/is creating.
From my point of view... I have to agree about the lack of imagination. Most of the people who have a beef with the class seems to be those who absolutely want precise and concise ruling that are read proof.
While people like that have their own rights. D&d states right from the get go that the books shouldnt be your only sources and that the rules here in shouldnt stop you from playing the way you want.
So yeah, i agree... Lack of imagination is definetely what the haters are all about.
As for being a well needed member of the group in your party... Well, one has to wonder... Why is it so important to you to be able to do everything ? Damage, healing, support... Whats left for the group then if you can do it all ? Thats the only point im worried about. If were giving everything to one class then why are the others necessary ?
Exemple of 3e where a wizard could do it all. So why bother give haste to the fighter when he couldnt fly and follow the dragon ? Why give him fly and haste if he couldnt have an ac of 80 like my wizard could ? Back then wizards were abusive, to the point where they outshined every other classes !
The artificer in 3e was filling a niche that was necessary to fill. It was better then a wizard at boosting others and crafting magical items. That specialisation made him a great asset to a team. Didnt matter that he was not a dps. Didnt matter that he couldnt be a great healer. He was the best support. That was his specialisation.
5e got away from that and decided everyone should be able to be versatile. But that they did wrong. You want to be a dps... Be a paladin with smites ! Up to this point i have seen not much other classes going that far in dps on a single strike. Yes a monk can do 4 attacks at 5th level... But 4 attacks at a d6+5 is nothing compared to 2 attacks at 2d6+5+20. Same with barbarians... Sure they got rage and reckless attacks... But they are nowhere near the damage output of a paladin with smites.
Taking all that in consideration, one has to wonder why is it so necessary that a single class do it all right ?
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
On the topic of talking with DM and using imagination, I think I have a different perspective to others as I usually have to search for random games, often not really knowing the DMs and hence it is not a great solution to negotiate all my idiosyncrasies with each new DM. I’d rather play mostly rules as written and never ask for mechanical advantages such as “Can I please craft a potion of fireball as I am a very Alchemist themed Druid...” probably yes but annoying if I try to explain to 5 different DMs.
If it can be made more robust I would be happier with more potions than homebrewing each time as not everyone will be happy to wait while I negotiate something that one helps me.
Have my third session next Monday, I'll keep this thread up to date on ant additional newnew feedb I have that I haven't already discussed.
Arutha, or simply use what we call comunication and ask a single question... ask your DM are you playing RAW, RAI or you homebrew your own stuff and allow imagination to take hold ?
that's what i do when joining a new game. the first thing you do anyway is to set yourself with the DM in any games. so why not start conversing by asking him what kind of liberties you have. i believe you'd be surprised by the number of DMs who would allow you without having to explain a thing. of course if you play adventurers league, they always go for RAW.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
I have a character who is using this Unearthed Arcana, and I'll admit I let him use it without double checking everything. I thought he was pulling my leg with all his abilities even at level 1 so I checked the character. Yesh... It's hard fitting an UA designed for Eberron in a RAW Forgotten Realms quest.
My question is, in the Replicate Magic Item infusion, do you actually need to have a magic item in the table in order to replicate it. I read it as a reverse engineering of a magic item to create another, but it doesn't explicitly say this. Can he just make a bag of holding at level 2 without first having a bag of holding as a template to study?
As I understand it, each item is an infusion slot. It doesn’t require the item but it *should* require the base thing (cloak, lantern, pouch, etc.). The infusion is the idea of how it operates, so short answer, yes.
A level 2 with a bag of holding isn’t game changing... not nearly as much as a level 4 with a many handed pouch.
Why did you think he was pulling your leg? They get spellcasting and Magical Tinkering, the same amount as a sorcerer or wizard. In fact, sorcerous origins usually give 2 level 1 features, so it's less than a sorcerer. They have a lot of features at higher levels, yeah, but I don't think it's that much of an issue, because that's normal for classes that aren't full casters.
DM for 3 campaigns
Lizardfolk Battle Smith Artificer
Gnome War Wizard
Human Tempest Cleric
It wasn't that the abilities were so OPed, but more the variety of them. It's a fun class with a very Eberon'y feel to it.
Yeah, I agree.
DM for 3 campaigns
Lizardfolk Battle Smith Artificer
Gnome War Wizard
Human Tempest Cleric
is the artificer going to be official?
I like 2 play spellcasters that can learn misty step.Also I like to play halflings,elves,dragonborn,warforged,teiflingfs, and half elf
Characters I play: Adron Nightbreeze
Help us Fight the godmodder! We need all the help we can get!
https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/user/Orcalord (use link to get to homebrewery)
Eventually, the plan is for it to go in the Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron, yes.
DM for 3 campaigns
Lizardfolk Battle Smith Artificer
Gnome War Wizard
Human Tempest Cleric
Jumping into the debate over clear rules, I'm Gina have to say that 5e is a great system that has a really upsetting issue with the design philosophy. In trying to give players as much freedom as possible, they seem to give over to being almost uselessly vague in a lot of instances. Being on a strange schedule and without a great internet connection at home, I can't exactly go shopping for new groups or DMs, and the ones I do play with tend to be rules sticklers. It's not derailing to the entire game by any means, but getting a clear answer on my questions is part of the reason I pay like $50 to buy these hardcover rulebooks.
I'd also like more definition and hard thematic elements beyond "oh your tools help you do the magic, make it up on your own". I want the Alchemist to actually do alchemy stuff, not be a pet-based support healer who I have to ~*~imagine~*~ doing alchemy! I want the Artillerist to have its focus on ARTILLERY, not wands that any old spellcaster has. Just give the turret more abilities instead! Stop forcing Eberron flavor into my universal class!
Though, TBF, I honestly don't even think Artificers and Alchemists should be related. I think alchemy and artifice have chemical vs. arcanomechanical trappings and should be separate entities altogether.
@ Salo,
The elements are there to account for the alchemy. You can work with your DM to make a better system for you BUT, there is a system in place for you to do more alchemy than other players... and to do it better (one example):
Alchemy Crafting: Takes 1/4 time and 1/2 gold.
Workday: 8hr.
Common: (1 per 2hr. @ 12.5g)
Any other character is going to spend 8 hours doing what you do in 2, they are going to spend twice the amount of gold, and they are going to have more complications and less successes. Now, that’s just one example out of what amounts to an expanded spell list of potions: Potions of Climbing, Healing, Bottled Breath, Oil of Slipperiness, Potions of Giant Strength, Heroism, Invulnerability, etc. Depending on your downtime/play ratio you could be bringing a lot of support to your group just through potions. (note: Make sure to set up, early on, with your group that you can save them money at least on potions of healing by making them ‘in-house’. I’ve made a lot of coin for crafting without it having to come from my poersonal coffers this way.)
Explan to your DM that it is a staple of your class and see if they can work with you to make it fit their needs, most DMs worth their salt will jump at the chance to homebrew with you.
Absolutely agree with Porphy.
One other question to ask yourself @Salo, can you really think of at least 10 subclasses for an Alchemist and seperate 10 for Artificer? I mean Alchemist crafts magic potions Artificer crafts magic items, seems correlated?
I do think the subclasses lack a initial feature to help feel more Alchemical/Artillery before jumping straight into the pets etc. For Alchemist I would suggest:
“You have learned to weave your spellcasting into potions. As part of a cast action you can choose to deliver a touch spell or Cantrip via a thrown potion. Make a ranged spell attack using your dexterity modifier, if targeting allies roll against an AC of 10.”
This. A thousand times, this! The already existing crafting mechanics seem to be overlooked by far too many people who'd like to have an entire crafting system built directly into the artificer class. There's no need for that due to all the reasons mentioned by Porphy, and even more - one of the artificer ability states:
And that means any and all checks you make for any tool whatsoever will be inherently better than any other party member. You are THE crafting hub of your group. You may not have it plainly described step-by-step, but you can do a lot of stuff with that, especially when you realise that "any tool" includes things like: thieves' tools, disguise kit, forgery kit, poisoner's kit etc. so in quite a few situations, you can work with your party's rouge like a dream duo.
Hell, add the fact that you can pick up any tool proficiency (and in your case - instant expertise) via downtime. If I recall, it's 10 - int mod workweeks, and since artificers tend to be intelligent, it's quite a short time (work week = 5 days, 8 hours of work each, so you still have a lot of spare time, and aren't "locked into" training). If your campaign isn't just one, uninterrupted heroic burst of adventures, you'll have plenty of time to pick up a metric ton of expertise and have some creative opportunity for many occasions.
Some people in this thread have already stated the many uses of mundane crafting that you can come up with, and that any DM worth their salt would be positively surprised by. One notable example that stuck to my mind was the use of Cobbler's Tools - possibly one of the most "wtf do I do with that?!" skills in the game, and yet someone came up with taking your party's shoes, and making them much, much more comfortable so that they can travel for longer than normal without suffering exhaustion from forced march. Mundane? Yes. Small bonus? Yes? Useful and creative? Hell yes!
Different opportunity: for jeweler's tools, take the gems and gold you've looted and turn them into fine jewelry (you have expertise, so you should get high results) and sell for much more. Want a use of thieve's tools outside of lockpicking and disarming traps? According to DMG, you can make traps with it, and the DC of said trap is what you roll on your check (and you have expertise).
Sky's the limit, just talk to your DM and the party about letting you "do your job" in any downtime, even if it's just 10 minutes before an incoming battle.
And just remember - you won't (and shouldn't) be "the" solution for every situation, and your crafting shouldn't circumvent the combat, which - unfortunately - many people want. You'll still have your ordinary combat, you'll still have chases, and many other "time's of the essence" situations in which you won't be able to just drop down on your butt and craft your wonders, but that's ok. Use it when it fits, use it creatively, and you'll bring something truly unique to the table without slowing the game to a crawl or forcing it to be about crafting (which not everyone likes).
Damn, it was supposed to just be a support and appreciation for Porphy's post, and here I am, ranting... I'll go away now.
Multiclass Warlock enthusiast.