@Marine2874

I am very sorry, but I just can't agree with you on any of your 6 opinions. I can see that you truely believe in what you are saying as someone who has played as a crafter through 2nd, 3rd, 4th <yech> & 5th edition D&D, and Pathfinder, your opinions and mine are very different on everything covered in your 6 points.

Player's in my campaign use tools all the time with the most used being Alchemist Supplies, Herbalism Kit, Tinker's Tools, Smithing Tools, and of course Thieves Tools.

I got to start playing a 3rd Artificer just tonight (Hobgoblin) and got to use my various Tools several times.

Sorry!

Quote from Marine2874 >>

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

To be fair, wizards natively learn forty-four spells (discounting cantrips) by level 20, eight of which can be 9th-level.  Even without ever once scribing a 'found' spell into their spellbook, wizards learn almost triple the spells a sorcerer does and double what a bard ends up with.  Yes, technically the divine casters "know" more spells, but their spell lists are sharply limited compared to wizards as accommodation for the fact that they have access to all of it to select from on short long rest.

Wizards don't need found spells to keep up, though it absolutely helps them.  As for 'balance', nobody likes being the party booby. 

Nobody plays this game to exclusively watch other people have fun.

Yurei,

You are correct.  A wizard naturally has access to 44 spells by the time they reach level 20.  However, there are 268 spells available to the wizard (not counting cantrips which there are 29).  So, if we use your line of thinking in regards to the spells that wizard knows, those 44 spells account for less than 17% of the total number of spells available to the wizard.  And while yes a Wizard can get eight 9th level spells, your 44 spells would effectively limit the wizard to approximately 5 spells per spell level (not counting cantrips).

No person playing a wizard will be satisfied with limiting themselves to just 44 spells.  Those players would want additional spells added to their spellbook, which would giving them more options of dealing with different situations (just like the 2019 Artificer's infusions and the right cantrip for the job abilities).

You are also wrong.  A wizard does need those found spells (found or purchased) in order to keep up.  There is no "balance" to the game just because a person playing a wizard doesn't want to be the "party booby".  Your statement..."nobody plays this game to exclusively watch other people have fun."  That is a true statement.  But if you *****, moan, or complain that your wizard wants to take the time to add new spells to their spellbook, this will make them feel like they are inconveniencing you.  Which can caused them to watch you fun have at their expense. 

 Here, unlike your other post, I have to agree with everythign you said. :)

Until I discovered the Artificer and Alchemist classes, Wizards were always my number one favorite class. It took forever back then to build up a wizard, and you were incredibly squishy, but if you survive you were a power. In 5th edition you just don't see wizards like Mordenkainen (he was in Curse of Strahd), Elminster, Raistlin, etc. Even the most powerful don't hold a candle to an individual like the Arch demilich Acercerak.

Quote from Mergon >>

Quote from Marine2874 >>

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

To be fair, wizards natively learn forty-four spells (discounting cantrips) by level 20, eight of which can be 9th-level.  Even without ever once scribing a 'found' spell into their spellbook, wizards learn almost triple the spells a sorcerer does and double what a bard ends up with.  Yes, technically the divine casters "know" more spells, but their spell lists are sharply limited compared to wizards as accommodation for the fact that they have access to all of it to select from on short long rest.

Wizards don't need found spells to keep up, though it absolutely helps them.  As for 'balance', nobody likes being the party booby. 

Nobody plays this game to exclusively watch other people have fun.

Yurei,

You are correct.  A wizard naturally has access to 44 spells by the time they reach level 20.  However, there are 268 spells available to the wizard (not counting cantrips which there are 29).  So, if we use your line of thinking in regards to the spells that wizard knows, those 44 spells account for less than 17% of the total number of spells available to the wizard.  And while yes a Wizard can get eight 9th level spells, your 44 spells would effectively limit the wizard to approximately 5 spells per spell level (not counting cantrips).

No person playing a wizard will be satisfied with limiting themselves to just 44 spells.  Those players would want additional spells added to their spellbook, which would giving them more options of dealing with different situations (just like the 2019 Artificer's infusions and the right cantrip for the job abilities).

You are also wrong.  A wizard does need those found spells (found or purchased) in order to keep up.  There is no "balance" to the game just because a person playing a wizard doesn't want to be the "party booby".  Your statement..."nobody plays this game to exclusively watch other people have fun."  That is a true statement.  But if you *****, moan, or complain that your wizard wants to take the time to add new spells to their spellbook, this will make them feel like they are inconveniencing you.  Which can caused them to watch you fun have at their expense. 

 Here, unlike your other post, I have to agree with everythign you said. :)

Until I discovered the Artificer and Alchemist classes, Wizards were always my number one favorite class. It took forever back then to build up a wizard, and you were incredibly squishy, but if you survive you were a power. In 5th edition you just don't see wizards like Mordenkainen (he was in Curse of Strahd), Elminster, Raistlin, etc. Even the most powerful don't hold a candle to an individual like the Arch demilich Acercerak.

I have my moments.  Not many mind you.

Quote from Mergon >>

@Marine2874

I am very sorry, but I just can't agree with you on any of your 6 opinions. I can see that you truely believe in what you are saying as someone who has played as a crafter through 2nd, 3rd, 4th <yech> & 5th edition D&D, and Pathfinder, your opinions and mine are very different on everything covered in your 6 points.

Player's in my campaign use tools all the time with the most used being Alchemist Supplies, Herbalism Kit, Tinker's Tools, Smithing Tools, and of course Thieves Tools.

I got to start playing a 3rd Artificer just tonight (Hobgoblin) and got to use my various Tools several times.

Sorry!

 

When you say use tools, are you talking about using them to cast spells?

The PHB is lacking guidance on what kinda of things tools can be used for, but Xanathar's Guide luckily gives some suggestions and some little perks to tool proficiencies. 

Well things confirmed in a small video released today.

Artillerist gets  new feature called arcane firearms

Homunculus is now an artificer infusion

If you own wayfarers guide you will get artificer but ONLY with alchemist the other 2 subclasses exclusive to the new book.

I missed that video. Thanks for the update.

Interesting.  Thanks for the heads up.

 Aww.  I really liked the homunculus, it was an interesting way to make the artificer's bonus action actually useful.  Hoping they actually replace that feature with something else equally cool, if they're expecting us to sacrifice a precious infusion slot for what used to be the class' base capabilities now.

I was really never a fan of the homunculus.  So I am happy that it has been removed from alchemist subclass.  With that being said, there is no information if the infusion homunculus will be the same as the original alchemist homunculus.  Also, there is a possibility that the infusion homunculus will be a modified version of the spell Find Familiar.

As for what is replacing the homunculus, I know that it has been mentioned that people wanted the Alchemist's Satchel to return.  So, it is possible that the Alchemist's Satchel (or something similar) will replace it.

Alchemist's Satchel.

So...we're going back to alchemists being restricted to madly hurling random alchemical reagents in the manner of a crazed baboon flinging its own feces in the hopes that whatever it hits with projectile poo is allergic to whatever it ate last.

Awesome.  So glad my classy magical tinkering adventurer gets to go back to being Dimestore Doc Brown on top of having to blow an infusion slot to get her companion back.  Ana'll be thrilled at that, she's always wanted Lab Accident hair and permanent soot face.  Not to mention her deep lifelong vendetta against eyebrows of any kind.

.
..
...

Awwww, I liked the homunculus, it was one of the few things I still liked about the Artificers.

@Yurei: Also, I've said it before and I'll say it again: WotC cares more about "streamlined" than "interesting"

Last I heard, WotC was talking about reintroducing the Satchel as an Infusion, not a subclass feature.  My information on that is fairly old so I could be wrong, but I was under the impression the Homunculus was being replaced with an entirely new feature.

You are making assumption.  There is no definite proof that the alchemist's satchel is coming back.  I just said that there was a possibility that it will come back as there are those who wanted to see it return.  There is also the possibility that the satchel will not come back and something else will take the place of the homunculus.  We'll just have to wait until the books are released to find out the final results of the Artificer and it's subclasses.

We get it you don't like the alchemist's satchel, but there are those of use who do like it.

The powers that be at WotC/D&D have said that infusions are not going to be subclass specific.  So that means that the alchemist's satchel would not be an infusion as it would be subclass specific.  

Also you are correct, the homunculus could be replaced with something new.  I was merely saying that I have heard that there are those who would want to see the alchemist's satchel return.

Ah okay, I hadn't heard them say that, though it makes sense not tying it to subclass seeing as the idea was unpopular when applied to Warlock invocations in a UA a while back.

It was in one of the D&D Beyond interviews or D&D update videos with Jeremy Crawford on Youtube.  Jeremy mentioned the possibility of the Alchemist's Satchel coming back (as there was a high enough demand in the surveys) and it was brought up about possibly making it an infusion.  However, Jeremy nixed the infusion idea as they didn't want to make infusions specific to a particular subclass.  

Hm, I just had a thought (though I'm not sure if it's a good one or not) that maybe there could be infusions that require certain tool proficiencies in order to use.

(Of course I realize it's too late to make that suggestion to WotC, but just thought I'd throw it out there.)

Quote from Marine2874 >>

We get it you don't like the alchemist's satchel, but there are those of use who do like it.

 
Heh.  To be fair, the same could be said for all the people who hated the homunculus.  Difference is that there were tons of different ways to fluff the homunuclus, make it interesting and your own.  There's...not really anything one can do with "Sack of Alchemical Flingin' Poo" except fling poo with it.  

I suppose I'd just like to know why, whenever someone other than me hears the word "alchemist" in a scenario that doesn't have anything to do with Fullmetal, the only thing they ever think of is some frizzy-haired, methed-up goober drooling into the soot stains on his chin while he throws acid around.  Not even naptha or alchemist's fire or gaseous agents, either - just acid  Just acid, always acid, nothing but acid, moar acid.  

They gave you guys Acid Splash and permission to reskin it as flinging acid vials.  Why gut the class and remove everything cool and useful about it now just to give people back their friggin' sack of acid?

Quote from Yurei1453 >>

Quote from Marine2874 >>

We get it you don't like the alchemist's satchel, but there are those of use who do like it.

 
Heh.  To be fair, the same could be said for all the people who hated the homunculus.  Difference is that there were tons of different ways to fluff the homunuclus, make it interesting and your own.  There's...not really anything one can do with "Sack of Alchemical Flingin' Poo" except fling poo with it.  

I suppose I'd just like to know why, whenever someone other than me hears the word "alchemist" in a scenario that doesn't have anything to do with Fullmetal, the only thing they ever think of is some frizzy-haired, methed-up goober drooling into the soot stains on his chin while he throws acid around.  Not even naptha or alchemist's fire or gaseous agents, either - just acid  Just acid, always acid, nothing but acid, moar acid.  

They gave you guys Acid Splash and permission to reskin it as flinging acid vials.  Why gut the class and remove everything cool and useful about it now just to give people back their friggin' sack of acid?

 You seem to feel very umm, strongly, about something that we don't even know is going to happen.