That was my experience too, that’s why I suggest the unique level 1 ability be Right cantrip for the Job, then level 2 you get normal half casting same as Paladin and Ranger, along with infusions. Fits better.
And some more expansions on Magical Tinkering are clear, had a good idea to add improvised artificers tools to the list, but needs something else to make you feel like 100% an Artificer rather than just Wizard.
They have already said they are not going to release the survey until the second UA containing the remaining Artificer content is released. No point in getting partial feedback from an incomplete class.
I know. I am merely stating that since the Artificer Revisited design is more in line with the Eberron setting, they may have already decided they would keep the Artificer Revisited as is. And, was stating that I would rather seeing a more generalized Artificer class with subclasses designed for the Eberron setting.
I guess people have a higher expectation, I only expected one more subclass with Wandslinger as my preferred subclass, however that would probably come with a change to Artillerist. I thought this was supposed to be a small addendum release but at this point it is 40 day work I do hope they did something bigger now as you say above. (But won’t be surprised)
Do you think any core changes from things they saw as feedback from reddit etc? Spellstoring at lower level etc?
I agree that a Wandslinger subclass would require a rework of the Artillerist. You would think that they would have already been working on any additional material for the Artificer before they release the Revisit and would take a couple of weeks to tweak the material and release it. At this point it feels like they started creating whole new subclasses from scratch as soon as they released the revisit.
I don't think there will be any changes to the core class just yet. They will more than likely wait to make any changes until after the survey is release and closed.
I guess people have a higher expectation, I only expected one more subclass with Wandslinger as my preferred subclass, however that would probably come with a change to Artillerist. I thought this was supposed to be a small addendum release but at this point it is 40 day work I do hope they did something bigger now as you say above. (But won’t be surprised)
Do you think any core changes from things they saw as feedback from reddit etc? Spellstoring at lower level etc?
I agree that a Wandslinger subclass would require a rework of the Artillerist. You would think that they would have already been working on any additional material for the Artificer before they release the Revisit and would take a couple of weeks to tweak the material and release it. At this point it feels like they started creating whole new subclasses from scratch as soon as they released the revisit.
I don't think there will be any changes to the core class just yet. They will more than likely wait to make any changes until after the survey is release and closed.
I think they're operating from this idea in the Eberron source book that a wandslinger is anyone who can use a wand and cast a cantrip with it. Personally, I think they're making a mistake by making it too general of a definition like that.
I just started an artificer in PbP. Lvl 1. It is really noticeable how slow this class is starting out. I would be happier with the class if they were able to choose their two cantrips after each long rest. 1st level magical tinkering has not been that useful. Still I am going to play it out and see how it goes.
I mentioned this in a previous post, the Magical Tinkering ability/class feature doesn't offer anything useful at all. The various effects would be more useful in attracting potential customers to a shop that sells magical items.
Given the nature of the class, they shouldn't have removed the Magic Item Analysis ability/class feature.
That was my experience too, that’s why I suggest the unique level 1 ability be Right cantrip for the Job, then level 2 you get normal half casting same as Paladin and Ranger, along with infusions. Fits better.
And some more expansions on Magical Tinkering are clear, had a good idea to add improvised artificers tools to the list, but needs something else to make you feel like 100% an Artificer rather than just Wizard.
While I don't care for Right Cantrip for the Job, giving the class this ability at 1st level makes it overpowered. At least with the 2017 Artificer you got your subclass at 1st level. Swapping the subclass and spellcasting features balanced the class. A player needs to choose their cantrips carefully as they will be stuck with them until at least 6th level if you are a Artillerist and gain the subclass feature Wand Prototype or 10th level where the character gains access to Right Cantrip for the Job. I understand that the Artificer "simulates" spells with their creations, but a 1st level Artificer isn't that experienced or knowledgeable, so giving them a powerful ability/class feature at the beginning will make them unbalanced and overpowered.
As for Magical Tinkering, I think that ability/class feature should go away and Magic Item Analysis should return. You are correct when you stated that "Artificer Revisited" feels like a Wizard. Expanding spellcasting "that isn't spellcasting" doesn't fit the Artificer. The Artificer is supposed to create and invent items and magical items (not have new ways to cast spells).
I guess people have a higher expectation, I only expected one more subclass with Wandslinger as my preferred subclass, however that would probably come with a change to Artillerist. I thought this was supposed to be a small addendum release but at this point it is 40 day work I do hope they did something bigger now as you say above. (But won’t be surprised)
Do you think any core changes from things they saw as feedback from reddit etc? Spellstoring at lower level etc?
I agree that a Wandslinger subclass would require a rework of the Artillerist. You would think that they would have already been working on any additional material for the Artificer before they release the Revisit and would take a couple of weeks to tweak the material and release it. At this point it feels like they started creating whole new subclasses from scratch as soon as they released the revisit.
I don't think there will be any changes to the core class just yet. They will more than likely wait to make any changes until after the survey is release and closed.
I think they're operating from this idea in the Eberron source book that a wandslinger is anyone who can use a wand and cast a cantrip with it. Personally, I think they're making a mistake by making it too general of a definition like that.
If you read Wand Prototype it states...
"By 6th level, you now regularly experiment with channeling different types of magic through wands. Whenever you finish a long rest and your woodcarver’s tools are with you, you can touch a nonmagical, wooden wand and turn it into a magic item. When you do so, you invest it with one artificer cantrip of your choice—even one you don’t know—that has a casting time of 1 action. As an action, you can cause the magic wand to produce the cantrip, using your spellcasting ability modifier (other creatures are unable to use the wand’s magic). The wand loses this magic when you finish your next long rest."
So, that means only the Artificer Artillerist will be the only person that will be able to use cantrip wands created using the Wand Prototype subclass feature (unless the DM homebrews a magic item that is a wand that casts a specific cantrip).
That was my experience too, that’s why I suggest the unique level 1 ability be Right cantrip for the Job, then level 2 you get normal half casting same as Paladin and Ranger, along with infusions. Fits better.
And some more expansions on Magical Tinkering are clear, had a good idea to add improvised artificers tools to the list, but needs something else to make you feel like 100% an Artificer rather than just Wizard.
While I don't care for Right Cantrip for the Job, giving the class this ability at 1st level makes it overpowered. At least with the 2017 Artificer you got your subclass at 1st level. Swapping the subclass and spellcasting features balanced the class. A player needs to choose their cantrips carefully as they will be stuck with them until at least 6th level if you are a Artillerist and gain the subclass feature Wand Prototype or 10th level where the character gains access to Right Cantrip for the Job. I understand that the Artificer "simulates" spells with their creations, but a 1st level Artificer isn't that experienced or knowledgeable, so giving them a powerful ability/class feature at the beginning will make them unbalanced and overpowered.
As for Magical Tinkering, I think that ability/class feature should go away and Magic Item Analysis should return. You are correct when you stated that "Artificer Revisited" feels like a Wizard. Expanding spellcasting "that isn't spellcasting" doesn't fit the Artificer. The Artificer is supposed to create and invent items and magical items (not have new ways to cast spells).
Let me try make my case for Right Cantrips for the Job at level 1 again, just because I think it is a very good solution.
First outlining exactly what I suggest. 1. Remove the Cantrip Column completely from the Class table. 2. Bring a lot of the fluff from Tools Required to Right Cantrip for the Job at first level. 3. Let the Artificer create 2 objects which recreate the effects of any Cantrip on the Artificer list. 4. On long rest and given a lot of tinkering the Artificer can swap one of his items to another Cantrip on the list. 5. Never give the Artificer any further Cantrips known.
When thinking about this on a power level it really doesn’t have any raw power over another full caster, it only grants flexibility. But as I said previously it is not like you can see a threat and Then change your cantrip to suit. It just creates a new unique space for this class to exist in.
Other benefits include less other features have to mention Cantrip casting cleaning up the class table for more Artificery features, in my ideal implementation nothing else would except maybe magic focused subclasses. And it helps fix the Half Caster skeleton of the class. And it gives the Artificer a Unique reason to be a multiclass choice at higher levels for another Caster main class, but not a power creep reason just a flexibility reason.
To explain why Artificer has Cantrips at all, they just need to add some flavour text along the line of: “You have always been jealous of Innate casters and Studied Wizards, while you know you may never get to recreate their highest level spells, you have worked tirelessly to bind the fundamentals of magic to your creations, beyond what even these spellcasters could do.” Like a Wizard who is jealous of innate casting going above and beyond Sorcerers to learn every spell, your attachment to the material does not allow you to master the fantastical but you do improve on the basic Cantrips just to show them.
PS. For bonus points and to round out the Artificer Core level 1 mechanics, I would combine everything we discussed into Magical Tinkering: All features there currently (as they all are worth nothing), the ability to over a short rest craft Artificer tools, and the ability to freecast Identify and Detect Magic.
One more topic, what does this forum think of the idea of giving half the Artificer subclasses the following feature (the other half getting Extra Attack)
Beginning at 5th level, you can cast a second Artificer Cantrip, whenever you cast an Artificer Cantrip as a main action on your turn. (Maybe as a Bonus Action)
This could potentially be power creep but it should still be barely comparable with Martials. At 5th level this means 2*2d10=22 if casting Firebolt, compared to 2*(2d6+4)=22 for fighter Greatsword. This is something I am stealing from my ideas for Eldritch Knight so it is quite high on power curve.
Note Artificer Cantrips to rule out Eldritch Blast issues. Only maybe +fire damage from Dragon Sorc is power creep but then we are level 11 at least: 2*(3d10+5)=43 compared to 3*(2d6+5)=36 but lacking magic item potential and feat interactions like GWM and PAM. If balance is concerning then let it eat the Bonus Action.
I think they're operating from this idea in the Eberron source book that a wandslinger is anyone who can use a wand and cast a cantrip with it. Personally, I think they're making a mistake by making it too general of a definition like that.
If you read Wand Prototype it states...
"By 6th level, you now regularly experiment with channeling different types of magic through wands. Whenever you finish a long rest and your woodcarver’s tools are with you, you can touch a nonmagical, wooden wand and turn it into a magic item. When you do so, you invest it with one artificer cantrip of your choice—even one you don’t know—that has a casting time of 1 action. As an action, you can cause the magic wand to produce the cantrip, using your spellcasting ability modifier (other creatures are unable to use the wand’s magic). The wand loses this magic when you finish your next long rest."
So, that means only the Artificer Artillerist will be the only person that will be able to use cantrip wands created using the Wand Prototype subclass feature (unless the DM homebrews a magic item that is a wand that casts a specific cantrip).
I was aware of that limitation. I was referring to the section on wandslingers in the Wayfinder's Guide To Eberron that states anyone who can use an arcane focus to cast their spells (and can cast at least 2 cantrips, my bad) can be considered a wandslinger if they so wish it; it's basically something that's entirely fluff. Sorry I wasn't more clear about that.
One more topic, what does this forum think of the idea of giving half the Artificer subclasses the following feature (the other half getting Extra Attack)
Beginning at 5th level, you can cast a second Artificer Cantrip, whenever you cast an Artificer Cantrip as a main action on your turn. (Maybe as a Bonus Action)
This could potentially be power creep but it should still be barely comparable with Martials. At 5th level this means 2*2d10=22 if casting Firebolt, compared to 2*(2d6+4)=22 for fighter Greatsword. This is something I am stealing from my ideas for Eldritch Knight so it is quite high on power curve.
Note Artificer Cantrips to rule out Eldritch Blast issues. Only maybe +fire damage from Dragon Sorc is power creep but then we are level 11 at least: 2*(3d10+5)=43 compared to 3*(2d6+5)=36 but lacking magic item potential and feat interactions like GWM and PAM. If balance is concerning then let it eat the Bonus Action.
I'm not really good with crunching numbers so I can't really speak to the balance side of your proposal; personally I'm not opposed to that idea, but I was thinking that using Potent Spellcasting (which is sort of what they're doing with the level 6 spellcasting abilities, but more limited) would be a viable option (just cut the limitations out of it). It also seems to me that WotC really wants you to be able to use your pet/turret abilities as a bonus action to cause more damage in combat, so I'm not sure they would want to add another class feature that would conflict with that (Again, not that I'm opposed).
Good point I forgot about BA in context of Artificer subclasses, that balancing suggestion was due to it previously coming from Eldritch Knight.
Number crunchy wise, potent spellcasting, just adding Mod to Cantrips, is not really enough compared to Extra Attack, which is why I thought of this as the Magic Equivalent.
Mmm, just spitballing here, but what if it were tied to level instead of spellcasting modifier? Like half your Artificer level rounded down?
EDIT: Although in this case, it might be worth remembering that Arificers as a class don't really have access to any hard-hitting weapons outside of the heavy crossbow...
I think they're operating from this idea in the Eberron source book that a wandslinger is anyone who can use a wand and cast a cantrip with it. Personally, I think they're making a mistake by making it too general of a definition like that.
If you read Wand Prototype it states...
"By 6th level, you now regularly experiment with channeling different types of magic through wands. Whenever you finish a long rest and your woodcarver’s tools are with you, you can touch a nonmagical, wooden wand and turn it into a magic item. When you do so, you invest it with one artificer cantrip of your choice—even one you don’t know—that has a casting time of 1 action. As an action, you can cause the magic wand to produce the cantrip, using your spellcasting ability modifier (other creatures are unable to use the wand’s magic). The wand loses this magic when you finish your next long rest."
So, that means only the Artificer Artillerist will be the only person that will be able to use cantrip wands created using the Wand Prototype subclass feature (unless the DM homebrews a magic item that is a wand that casts a specific cantrip).
I was aware of that limitation. I was referring to the section on wandslingers in the Wayfinder's Guide To Eberron that states anyone who can use an arcane focus to cast their spells (and can cast at least 2 cantrips, my bad) can be considered a wandslinger if they so wish it; it's basically something that's entirely fluff. Sorry I wasn't more clear about that.
NP, I don't have Wayfinder's Guide To Eberron. But thanks for the clarification.
That was my experience too, that’s why I suggest the unique level 1 ability be Right cantrip for the Job, then level 2 you get normal half casting same as Paladin and Ranger, along with infusions. Fits better.
And some more expansions on Magical Tinkering are clear, had a good idea to add improvised artificers tools to the list, but needs something else to make you feel like 100% an Artificer rather than just Wizard.
While I don't care for Right Cantrip for the Job, giving the class this ability at 1st level makes it overpowered. At least with the 2017 Artificer you got your subclass at 1st level. Swapping the subclass and spellcasting features balanced the class. A player needs to choose their cantrips carefully as they will be stuck with them until at least 6th level if you are a Artillerist and gain the subclass feature Wand Prototype or 10th level where the character gains access to Right Cantrip for the Job. I understand that the Artificer "simulates" spells with their creations, but a 1st level Artificer isn't that experienced or knowledgeable, so giving them a powerful ability/class feature at the beginning will make them unbalanced and overpowered.
As for Magical Tinkering, I think that ability/class feature should go away and Magic Item Analysis should return. You are correct when you stated that "Artificer Revisited" feels like a Wizard. Expanding spellcasting "that isn't spellcasting" doesn't fit the Artificer. The Artificer is supposed to create and invent items and magical items (not have new ways to cast spells).
Let me try make my case for Right Cantrips for the Job at level 1 again, just because I think it is a very good solution.
First outlining exactly what I suggest. 1. Remove the Cantrip Column completely from the Class table. 2. Bring a lot of the fluff from Tools Required to Right Cantrip for the Job at first level. 3. Let the Artificer create 2 objects which recreate the effects of any Cantrip on the Artificer list. 4. On long rest and given a lot of tinkering the Artificer can swap one of his items to another Cantrip on the list. 5. Never give the Artificer any further Cantrips known.
When thinking about this on a power level it really doesn’t have any raw power over another full caster, it only grants flexibility. But as I said previously it is not like you can see a threat and Then change your cantrip to suit. It just creates a new unique space for this class to exist in.
Other benefits include less other features have to mention Cantrip casting cleaning up the class table for more Artificery features, in my ideal implementation nothing else would except maybe magic focused subclasses. And it helps fix the Half Caster skeleton of the class. And it gives the Artificer a Unique reason to be a multiclass choice at higher levels for another Caster main class, but not a power creep reason just a flexibility reason.
To explain why Artificer has Cantrips at all, they just need to add some flavour text along the line of: “You have always been jealous of Innate casters and Studied Wizards, while you know you may never get to recreate their highest level spells, you have worked tirelessly to bind the fundamentals of magic to your creations, beyond what even these spellcasters could do.” Like a Wizard who is jealous of innate casting going above and beyond Sorcerers to learn every spell, your attachment to the material does not allow you to master the fantastical but you do improve on the basic Cantrips just to show them.
PS. For bonus points and to round out the Artificer Core level 1 mechanics, I would combine everything we discussed into Magical Tinkering: All features there currently (as they all are worth nothing), the ability to over a short rest craft Artificer tools, and the ability to freecast Identify and Detect Magic.
If you remove the Cantrip Column, you remove the Cantrip spells altogether. Why would you have a Cantrip spell list if you don't have a Cantrip column? However, instead of the ability/class feature "The Right Cantrip for the Job", you can create a feature that allows the character have a handheld invention (that they created) that can have effects similar to a cantrip, and can be taken apart and put back together to simulate the effect of another cantrip. But instead of a long list of cantrip spells that it can simulate, you give a handful of effects similar to cantrips (like 5).
I kind of think of it like how Warlocks don’t exactly learn 6th level plus spells and yet they still have a list of them due to Mystic Arcanum, even though that is not actually part of their spellcasting ability. (Warlock’s class table columns relating to spells never mention spells of level 6+)
I wouldn’t really equate the implementation you suggest as I give a choice of 15 where the other implementation gives a choice of 5. And/Or takes much longer to fit into the class description. The other implementation I would suggest is similar to the tome warlock let them choose Cantrips from any other classes list. As I described them being jealous of other classes magic abilities. (Or maybe just wizard like the half casters do, but that has a less thematic list than the current Artificer) Giving a huge list of which you can only prepare just 2 is not going to over shadow anything as you always have to make the choice and it takes so long to change.
Edit: we have to exclude Eldritch Blast somehow as that is just too much power to transfer around. Maybe just wizard and Druid?
Okay, spitballing again: What if we created a feature for creating cantrip-like effects from an item you craft? I had a look at the cantrips available to the Artificer and used that to try and create a point-buy system for...let's call it a "Modular Cantrip Creator" that caps out at 8 points. Please note that I am well aware that the following table is SEVERELY flawed, but I'd like to know what people's thoughts on the concept would be:
Damage dice
Range
Damage type
Attack type
Additional effects
1d4 (0p)
Touch (0p)
Acid
Spell Attack (0p)
No effect (0p)
1d6 (1p)
10ft (1p)
Cold
Dex save (1p)
Extra target within 5ft (3p) (save required)
1d8 (2p)
30ft (2p)
Fire
Con save (2p)
Target pulled 10ft (4p)
1d10 (3p)
60ft (3p)
Lightning
Speed reduced 10ft (3p)
1d12 (4p)
120ft (4p)
Poison
Loses reaction (3p)
Bludgeoning
Ignites/damages object (1p)
Piercing
Advantage against armor type (3p)
Slashing
As stated before, the above table is deeply flawed, and to anyone who says having normal cantrips is fine: I actually agree, I was just curious if the concept itself might be good or not.
Oof, that table was bigger than I thought it'd be! Anyone who wants to reply to it, please reply to this comment instead so the conversation doesn't take up ridiculous amounts of space, lol.
Oof, that table was bigger than I thought it'd be! Anyone who wants to reply to it, please reply to this comment instead so the conversation doesn't take up ridiculous amounts of space, lol.
Yup interesting mechanic could be fun. Maybe if expanding to inclide other Cantrips, adding any other RAW Cantrip side effect as a 4point cost, and necrotic radiant or Force as 2point costers.
to be honest, i never understood why we need a full class for artificer. i think the wizard archetype was a great way of doing it.
i've been working with a friend who wants to be a wizard, but wants to craft stuff. i told him to get artificer levels. but to be honest... he wanted a healing wizard. something that do not exists and thus we created this archetype much like the battlemaster in the fighter, it has maneuvers or "tools" that he can use a certain number of times per day. i created 5 tools because he's level 3 and i have time to get more, but we realised that these "tools" much like maneuvers. can easily be aded to create stuff up, making you an artificer in the mix. looking at the battle master and the way it works, it leaves room for many things still and it works. so i dont understand why people think a new class is needed when an archetype can recreate the feel you seek. though i understand you want full archetype choices and that cannot be done really in archetypes. having a bunch of "invocations" or "Maneuvers" that allow a choice could literally change the whole class based on your choices.
exemple of what i did for "Combat Witch" which is what i called the archetype. at level 2, the combat witch gains the following... - proficiency in medecin - a choice of 2 Tools from the Tools list below. gain 2 more tools from the list at level 6, 10 and 14. - can use tools a number of times equal to 1+charisma bonus per long rest
Tools - Adrenaline Rush, bonus action inject 1d8+int temporary hp into a target 5 feet from you.
this is just one exemple of tools, imagine i gave him 5 of that and he had difficulty choosing, he wanted them all. now imagine we create 5 tools for wands slingers, 5 tools for golemancer and so on and so forth. you could literally create your artificer entirely based on those choices. and that is only following the fighter battle master archetype. so i'm wondering why a new class is necessary at this point. i also am reading on what you guys are doing and i believe you are just falling back down to other class mechanics as well, thus why not just pick that class and make it an archetype. its not like archetype were small and without choices. look at the battle master, the sorcerer or the monk, they can literally change the way they play by the choices in their archetypes.
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)
That's an interesting take on character creation. I like it. I think the artificer is too much wizard, just flavored differently. That is true of many of the spells in the game. Pick a spell and look at how many different classes have access to it. I think more exclusivity would make the classes more distinct. Why would druids, paladins, wizards, etc all have the same spell? I know that won't happen because it is too big of a change for the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That was my experience too, that’s why I suggest the unique level 1 ability be Right cantrip for the Job, then level 2 you get normal half casting same as Paladin and Ranger, along with infusions. Fits better.
And some more expansions on Magical Tinkering are clear, had a good idea to add improvised artificers tools to the list, but needs something else to make you feel like 100% an Artificer rather than just Wizard.
I know. I am merely stating that since the Artificer Revisited design is more in line with the Eberron setting, they may have already decided they would keep the Artificer Revisited as is. And, was stating that I would rather seeing a more generalized Artificer class with subclasses designed for the Eberron setting.
I agree that a Wandslinger subclass would require a rework of the Artillerist. You would think that they would have already been working on any additional material for the Artificer before they release the Revisit and would take a couple of weeks to tweak the material and release it. At this point it feels like they started creating whole new subclasses from scratch as soon as they released the revisit.
I don't think there will be any changes to the core class just yet. They will more than likely wait to make any changes until after the survey is release and closed.
I think they're operating from this idea in the Eberron source book that a wandslinger is anyone who can use a wand and cast a cantrip with it. Personally, I think they're making a mistake by making it too general of a definition like that.
I mentioned this in a previous post, the Magical Tinkering ability/class feature doesn't offer anything useful at all. The various effects would be more useful in attracting potential customers to a shop that sells magical items.
Given the nature of the class, they shouldn't have removed the Magic Item Analysis ability/class feature.
While I don't care for Right Cantrip for the Job, giving the class this ability at 1st level makes it overpowered. At least with the 2017 Artificer you got your subclass at 1st level. Swapping the subclass and spellcasting features balanced the class. A player needs to choose their cantrips carefully as they will be stuck with them until at least 6th level if you are a Artillerist and gain the subclass feature Wand Prototype or 10th level where the character gains access to Right Cantrip for the Job. I understand that the Artificer "simulates" spells with their creations, but a 1st level Artificer isn't that experienced or knowledgeable, so giving them a powerful ability/class feature at the beginning will make them unbalanced and overpowered.
As for Magical Tinkering, I think that ability/class feature should go away and Magic Item Analysis should return. You are correct when you stated that "Artificer Revisited" feels like a Wizard. Expanding spellcasting "that isn't spellcasting" doesn't fit the Artificer. The Artificer is supposed to create and invent items and magical items (not have new ways to cast spells).
If you read Wand Prototype it states...
"By 6th level, you now regularly experiment with channeling different types of magic through wands. Whenever you finish a long rest and your woodcarver’s tools are with you, you can touch a nonmagical, wooden wand and turn it into a magic item. When you do so, you invest it with one artificer cantrip of your choice—even one you don’t know—that has a casting time of 1 action. As an action, you can cause the magic wand to produce the cantrip, using your spellcasting ability modifier (other creatures are unable to use the wand’s magic). The wand loses this magic when you finish your next long rest."
So, that means only the Artificer Artillerist will be the only person that will be able to use cantrip wands created using the Wand Prototype subclass feature (unless the DM homebrews a magic item that is a wand that casts a specific cantrip).
Let me try make my case for Right Cantrips for the Job at level 1 again, just because I think it is a very good solution.
First outlining exactly what I suggest. 1. Remove the Cantrip Column completely from the Class table. 2. Bring a lot of the fluff from Tools Required to Right Cantrip for the Job at first level. 3. Let the Artificer create 2 objects which recreate the effects of any Cantrip on the Artificer list. 4. On long rest and given a lot of tinkering the Artificer can swap one of his items to another Cantrip on the list. 5. Never give the Artificer any further Cantrips known.
When thinking about this on a power level it really doesn’t have any raw power over another full caster, it only grants flexibility. But as I said previously it is not like you can see a threat and Then change your cantrip to suit. It just creates a new unique space for this class to exist in.
Other benefits include less other features have to mention Cantrip casting cleaning up the class table for more Artificery features, in my ideal implementation nothing else would except maybe magic focused subclasses. And it helps fix the Half Caster skeleton of the class. And it gives the Artificer a Unique reason to be a multiclass choice at higher levels for another Caster main class, but not a power creep reason just a flexibility reason.
To explain why Artificer has Cantrips at all, they just need to add some flavour text along the line of: “You have always been jealous of Innate casters and Studied Wizards, while you know you may never get to recreate their highest level spells, you have worked tirelessly to bind the fundamentals of magic to your creations, beyond what even these spellcasters could do.” Like a Wizard who is jealous of innate casting going above and beyond Sorcerers to learn every spell, your attachment to the material does not allow you to master the fantastical but you do improve on the basic Cantrips just to show them.
PS. For bonus points and to round out the Artificer Core level 1 mechanics, I would combine everything we discussed into Magical Tinkering: All features there currently (as they all are worth nothing), the ability to over a short rest craft Artificer tools, and the ability to freecast Identify and Detect Magic.
One more topic, what does this forum think of the idea of giving half the Artificer subclasses the following feature (the other half getting Extra Attack)
Beginning at 5th level, you can cast a second Artificer Cantrip, whenever you cast an Artificer Cantrip as a main action on your turn. (Maybe as a Bonus Action)
This could potentially be power creep but it should still be barely comparable with Martials. At 5th level this means 2*2d10=22 if casting Firebolt, compared to 2*(2d6+4)=22 for fighter Greatsword. This is something I am stealing from my ideas for Eldritch Knight so it is quite high on power curve.
Note Artificer Cantrips to rule out Eldritch Blast issues. Only maybe +fire damage from Dragon Sorc is power creep but then we are level 11 at least: 2*(3d10+5)=43 compared to 3*(2d6+5)=36 but lacking magic item potential and feat interactions like GWM and PAM. If balance is concerning then let it eat the Bonus Action.
I was aware of that limitation. I was referring to the section on wandslingers in the Wayfinder's Guide To Eberron that states anyone who can use an arcane focus to cast their spells (and can cast at least 2 cantrips, my bad) can be considered a wandslinger if they so wish it; it's basically something that's entirely fluff. Sorry I wasn't more clear about that.
I'm not really good with crunching numbers so I can't really speak to the balance side of your proposal; personally I'm not opposed to that idea, but I was thinking that using Potent Spellcasting (which is sort of what they're doing with the level 6 spellcasting abilities, but more limited) would be a viable option (just cut the limitations out of it). It also seems to me that WotC really wants you to be able to use your pet/turret abilities as a bonus action to cause more damage in combat, so I'm not sure they would want to add another class feature that would conflict with that (Again, not that I'm opposed).
Good point I forgot about BA in context of Artificer subclasses, that balancing suggestion was due to it previously coming from Eldritch Knight.
Number crunchy wise, potent spellcasting, just adding Mod to Cantrips, is not really enough compared to Extra Attack, which is why I thought of this as the Magic Equivalent.
Mmm, just spitballing here, but what if it were tied to level instead of spellcasting modifier? Like half your Artificer level rounded down?
EDIT: Although in this case, it might be worth remembering that Arificers as a class don't really have access to any hard-hitting weapons outside of the heavy crossbow...
NP, I don't have Wayfinder's Guide To Eberron. But thanks for the clarification.
If you remove the Cantrip Column, you remove the Cantrip spells altogether. Why would you have a Cantrip spell list if you don't have a Cantrip column? However, instead of the ability/class feature "The Right Cantrip for the Job", you can create a feature that allows the character have a handheld invention (that they created) that can have effects similar to a cantrip, and can be taken apart and put back together to simulate the effect of another cantrip. But instead of a long list of cantrip spells that it can simulate, you give a handful of effects similar to cantrips (like 5).
I kind of think of it like how Warlocks don’t exactly learn 6th level plus spells and yet they still have a list of them due to Mystic Arcanum, even though that is not actually part of their spellcasting ability. (Warlock’s class table columns relating to spells never mention spells of level 6+)
I wouldn’t really equate the implementation you suggest as I give a choice of 15 where the other implementation gives a choice of 5. And/Or takes much longer to fit into the class description. The other implementation I would suggest is similar to the tome warlock let them choose Cantrips from any other classes list. As I described them being jealous of other classes magic abilities. (Or maybe just wizard like the half casters do, but that has a less thematic list than the current Artificer) Giving a huge list of which you can only prepare just 2 is not going to over shadow anything as you always have to make the choice and it takes so long to change.
Edit: we have to exclude Eldritch Blast somehow as that is just too much power to transfer around. Maybe just wizard and Druid?
Okay, spitballing again: What if we created a feature for creating cantrip-like effects from an item you craft? I had a look at the cantrips available to the Artificer and used that to try and create a point-buy system for...let's call it a "Modular Cantrip Creator" that caps out at 8 points. Please note that I am well aware that the following table is SEVERELY flawed, but I'd like to know what people's thoughts on the concept would be:
Damage dice
Range
Damage type
Attack type
Additional effects
1d4 (0p)
Touch (0p)
Acid
Spell Attack (0p)
No effect (0p)
1d6 (1p)
10ft (1p)
Cold
Dex save (1p)
Extra target within 5ft (3p) (save required)
1d8 (2p)
30ft (2p)
Fire
Con save (2p)
Target pulled 10ft (4p)
1d10 (3p)
60ft (3p)
Lightning
Speed reduced 10ft (3p)
1d12 (4p)
120ft (4p)
Poison
Loses reaction (3p)
Bludgeoning
Ignites/damages object (1p)
Piercing
Advantage against armor type (3p)
Slashing
As stated before, the above table is deeply flawed, and to anyone who says having normal cantrips is fine: I actually agree, I was just curious if the concept itself might be good or not.
Oof, that table was bigger than I thought it'd be! Anyone who wants to reply to it, please reply to this comment instead so the conversation doesn't take up ridiculous amounts of space, lol.
Yup interesting mechanic could be fun. Maybe if expanding to inclide other Cantrips, adding any other RAW Cantrip side effect as a 4point cost, and necrotic radiant or Force as 2point costers.
to be honest, i never understood why we need a full class for artificer. i think the wizard archetype was a great way of doing it.
i've been working with a friend who wants to be a wizard, but wants to craft stuff. i told him to get artificer levels. but to be honest...
he wanted a healing wizard. something that do not exists and thus we created this archetype much like the battlemaster in the fighter, it has maneuvers or "tools" that he can use a certain number of times per day. i created 5 tools because he's level 3 and i have time to get more, but we realised that these "tools" much like maneuvers. can easily be aded to create stuff up, making you an artificer in the mix. looking at the battle master and the way it works, it leaves room for many things still and it works. so i dont understand why people think a new class is needed when an archetype can recreate the feel you seek. though i understand you want full archetype choices and that cannot be done really in archetypes. having a bunch of "invocations" or "Maneuvers" that allow a choice could literally change the whole class based on your choices.
exemple of what i did for "Combat Witch" which is what i called the archetype.
at level 2, the combat witch gains the following...
- proficiency in medecin
- a choice of 2 Tools from the Tools list below. gain 2 more tools from the list at level 6, 10 and 14.
- can use tools a number of times equal to 1+charisma bonus per long rest
Tools
- Adrenaline Rush, bonus action inject 1d8+int temporary hp into a target 5 feet from you.
this is just one exemple of tools, imagine i gave him 5 of that and he had difficulty choosing, he wanted them all. now imagine we create 5 tools for wands slingers, 5 tools for golemancer and so on and so forth. you could literally create your artificer entirely based on those choices. and that is only following the fighter battle master archetype. so i'm wondering why a new class is necessary at this point. i also am reading on what you guys are doing and i believe you are just falling back down to other class mechanics as well, thus why not just pick that class and make it an archetype. its not like archetype were small and without choices. look at the battle master, the sorcerer or the monk, they can literally change the way they play by the choices in their archetypes.
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)
That's an interesting take on character creation. I like it. I think the artificer is too much wizard, just flavored differently. That is true of many of the spells in the game. Pick a spell and look at how many different classes have access to it. I think more exclusivity would make the classes more distinct. Why would druids, paladins, wizards, etc all have the same spell? I know that won't happen because it is too big of a change for the game.