He actually is a Buffer (enlarge/reduce, sanctuary, longstrider, blur, shield of faith, enhance ability, magic weapon, stoneskin, etc) And, not only is he a Buffer, He is also potentially a more powerful one because of his ability to cast "self" targeting spells on allies; and do so without wasting an action in combat. (Interacting with a pre-made token would be a free action, or you can hand out the tokens before a fight like goodberries) He also has limited healing abilities.
He can't wild-shape, sure, but he has an iron gollum following him around which does do melee, does have multiattack, has more HP than anything on either the druid or ranger's lists and is out and out more powerful until level 10-15 or so (arguable). You can ride it into battle like a mount(if you are a medium or smaller creature). You get defensive attacks of opportunity with flanking bonuses if you position it correctly, or else you can use it like a semi disposable meat shield. Either way, he's not helpless.
He's also packed with out-of-combat utility, which is fairly obviously where he shines.
As for "he's a shooter, that's all he is, he can't do anything else" This is true, but so what? Why on earth do you want to put a 2handed greataxe in his hand in the first place? His gun has a 150' range. Like I said, if you WANT to play a fighter, go play a fighter. I'm not saying he's OP, I'm saying that I LIKE the variety and diversity his class brings to the game, and I don't feel the need to give him 4x10d6 smites per round. His DPS is at a good level(or at least it's close), and the areas that he needs buffed are elsewhere. (like his spell pool and his + to hit)
Edit: 8/10
You don't need to drop the gun to interact with other objects. Like a longbow, you can hold it in one hand, and, like any weapon, you can choose to drop it or "sheath" it (sling it over your shoulder). The only reason that you would drop it instead of holstering it, is that you wanted to draw a melee weapon and attack with it in a single turn. Which is where your bayonet idea becomes problematic because it would turn your thundercannon into a melee/150'/500' spear that smites at range. IMO, this should cost something. Perhaps all it costs is time and materials in-game? Perhaps it's a class specific feat? Perhaps a Wonderous Invention slot? I don't know, BUT in the context of the game I see no reason why the artificer should just be able to brawl with his gun by default. As simple of a concept as a bayonet is, there is a reason that the longbow can't simply be used like an improvised quarterstaff. Think of it this way, your gun is a delicate magical object that wasn't designed to be used like a club or a sword. You don't want to bash it against shields and then run off and pull that trigger because the gun might explode! You want to protect that gun, it's your life! A bayonet is more than sticking a knife into the barrel of a blunderbuss, it's reinforcing the entire weapon, changing it's balance, and ultimately making it resilient enough that you can use it to parry a blow without killing yourself.
If I WERE going to give the farm away for free, it would be more of a thematic reskinning. Eg: on your turn you can sheath your gun and sling it over your shoulder (free action) and draw a long-sword (main action) by RAW. So, if you wanted, I would allow you to have a bayonet, but drawing it and attaching it to your gun would take a whole round just like it does now. I wouldn't grant you proficiency (unless you had proficiency with longswords, which you don't by default) and it would be str based, rather than dex. Removing the bayonet and putting it away, would also take an action, although you could drop the bayonet if you wanted. In my opinion, by RAW, this is already explicitly allowed and any DM would have a hard time arguing against it.
I like a bayonet idea because back when I was playing pathfinder, I loved the Gunslinger. I was playing a Dwarf Gunslinger with a decent strength score (16 I think). There is some situations where a melee attack is a better option. I can also use a bayonet as a dagger. But on a musket it becomes a spear. Buts that is pathfinder this is 5th ed.
You can't have a longsword. You can't even have a rapier. The best weapon you can have, if you're gonna have to melee, is a quarterstaff, and that's two handed to get a d8.
Meanwhile, you cannot sheathe a weapon and draw one and attack in the same turn, unless you have the Dual Wielding feat. You can drop a weapon and draw one and attack, But sheathing one is interacting with an object, and drawing one is interacting with an object, and you can't interact with two objects in one turn without the feat.
You could hold the gun in one hand and melee with the other, of course. But once you have gotten out of melee contact, You'll either have to drop your sword or spend the next turn sheathing it before you can shoot anything. Meanwhile, there's no reason whatsoever that the bayonet could not be permanently affixed to the gun. I don't want a greataxe; I just don't want to have to drop a weapon when forced to fight. And a bayonet on the gun being a spear is not OP. Meanwhile, fragile object, pfft. It's a gun. It's not magical when it was created. It fires magical bullets later on, though.
And changing the 'balance"? Not with any bayonet on any of the many long arms I have ever handled. You know how much an arquebus weighs?
Meanwhile, you cannot sheathe a weapon and draw one and attack in the same turn, unless you have the Dual Wielding feat. You can drop a weapon and draw one and attack, But sheathing one is interacting with an object, and drawing one is interacting with an object, and you can't interact with two objects in one turn without the feat.
[Tooltip Not Found].
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Indeed. Having used your free action to sheathe your gun, you then take your action to Use An Object, which was DRAWING the sword. That WAS YOUR ACTION. You are now done. Your Action was to Use An Object. Rather than Attack, which is also an action. Attack and Use An Object are NOT the same action. You do one or the other. You cannot sheathe AND draw AND attack in the same turn. Unless you have the Dual Wielding feat.
Indeed. Having used your free action to sheathe your gun, you then take your action to Use An Object, which was DRAWING the sword. That WAS YOUR ACTION. You are now done. Your Action was to Use An Object. Rather than Attack, which is also an action. Attack and Use An Object are NOT the same action. You do one or the other. You cannot sheathe AND draw AND attack in the same turn. Unless you have the Dual Wielding feat.
1. He didn't say you could.
2. The feat only applies to one-handed melee weapons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
In Sage Advice - an authoritative source - it says: "On your turn, you can interact with one object for free, either during your move or during an action (PH, 190). One of the most common object interactions is drawing or stowing a weapon. Interacting with a second object on the same turn requires an action. You need a feature like the Dual Wielder feat to draw or stow a second weapon for free."
You CAN have a longsword, you just don't get proficiency. You still get whatever your + to hit is, just not proficiency... and, if you want to be that kind of artificer, you can always go elf. Elves make great artificers and get martial training... Otherwise, yeah, shortsword d6, scimitar d6 (finesse) or quarterstaff 2h d8, which again, I don't have a problem with. Artificers AREN'T trained in martial combat by default. That Proficiency comes from somewhere.
I don't understand your second paragraph. You seem to be disagreeing with me, but you are just repeating what I said... Yes, the only reason that you would drop the gun, instead of sheathing it, is because you wanted to draw and attack in the same turn. Somehow, 5 posts later, I think we all can agree on that point. Nevertheless, that is your decision. You don't HAVE TO play the artificer that way, I agree it's inefficient and awkward, and requires you to invest (something) to get something. That's life.
I didn't mean that adding a bayonet would change the balance of the gun, I meant that if you were to re-design your gun to be well-suited to polearm combat, you would ideally want to change the balance, so that you can hold it easier. That said, it's fluff, regardless. Make up your own fluff, if you don't like mine. The point is you don't need a longsword/gun, and if you DO need a Longsword/Gun, then great, that's what feats and roleplay, and racial choice is for.
Personally, I think there is plenty of room for a kickass class-specific feat here (and you should look at close-quarter shooter because it comes ready made and it's flatly better), but I do think it should cost you a feat, if you aren't willing to settle for a dagger or scimitar. I might come up with something like this: Grizzled Increase the range of your thunder-cannon to 200'/650' You have permanently fixed a bayonet to the front of your thunder cannon that can be used for melee combat. The new thundercannon is does 1d6 piercing melee damage and has the finesse property. You are proficient with all aspects of your new thunder cannon. When you successfully make a melee' attack utilizing this feature, you may attempt to pull the trigger and deal additional damage. Make a melee spell attack utilizing your intelligence stat, if successful, you may roll 1d4 fire damage for each 2 artificer levels you have, rounded down.
So 1) Gunblade. Nerdgasm. Moving on. 2) A second type of damage! ZOMG. So needed. 3) Not limited to JUST a melee improvement.
I like the melee stab and shoot combo Diplomacy. I have rolled up a 5th level dwarf gunsmith and took Crossbow expert as a feat. I could re flavor it to look like I'm in melee with a bayonet.
I've been playing around with the idea of allowing the Artificer player in my campaign to use his mechanical servant as a Mech. Like a Gundam or RIFTS style Glitter Boy. It will be a while before he gets it built, he's only level 2 at the moment (and I'm known for slow advancements) so I have plenty of time to figure out how I would make it work fairly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Welcome to the Grand Illusion, come on in and see what's happening, pay the price, get your ticket for the show....
You are a dangerous foe to face while mounted. While you are mounted and aren’t incapacitated, you gain the following benefits:
You have advantage on melee attack rolls against any unmounted creature that is smaller than your mount.
You can force an attack targeted at you to target your mount instead.
If your mount is subjected to an effect that allows it to make a Dexterity saving throw to take only half damage, it instead takes no damage if it succeeds on the saving throw, and only half damage if it fails.
There you go. Have him pick up the mounted combatant feet, and I'd say you're done. He's sitting pretty in his mech.
I assumed that the artificer needed one, since there is a whole section in the UA regarding spell-casting focus. I however went the long route and proceeded to procure the actual ingredients for my spells separately...
As long as you have a free hand, you should be able to perform the somatic portion of a spell. I would only worry about war caster for someone who either has 2 weapons, or a weapon and a shield. That being said, the artificer is kindof specialized to NOT do combat magic. If you are casting your spells mid fight, rather than before hand, you are being less efficient than you could be.
I would like to see the alchemical formulas have expanded versatility. More buffing options and more diversity of damage types and more battlefield control types. I think quantity limits could balance this out (rather than the once per long rest mechanic seen in the healing draught,) perhaps arty lvl + int mod vials per short rest or something? I would also like to see them function similar to hail of thorns- insofaras the initial hit is a ranged attack (or ranged spell attack) while anything w/in 5ft makes a Dex save for all or nothing dmg.
Another thing to consider: survivability. With 30 ft range on those thrown attacks, the arty will be within range of many enemies' move and melee attacks, as well as ranged, aoe, and spell attacks. Perhaps incorporating evasion/uncanny would be a solution, but I would think thematically some form of armor or shield would be better. Say for instance the mechanic is the same as uncanny dodge, but instead it looks like a shield that telescopes out of a bracer or something.
As for the construct, I would suggest it at least gets a hit die like any pc, and also that the arty can spend some gold and downtime, at certain level increases, to construct 'reinforced armor plating' to increase its AC. If a flying creature template is used for a flying mount, the 30 ft thrown range on alchemy vials will need to be adjusted. My suggestion would be an Int-based proficiency attack (as the arty would need to be calculating airspeed, windspeed, aerodynamics, etc for their 'bombing run'), with a defined range increment like any other range weapon.
Also, I would think the wondrous item feature implies the ability to replace/repair said items, as it says the arty 'crafted' the item. (Also implied by the arty's ability to craft, and then repair/replace the construct companion.) I'd include a gold/time element to be sure, but what artificer wouldn't take notes and have a set of blueprints/instructions from their initial efforts?
As for the gunsmith, it seems to be the more powerful/popular choice and there's already quite a lot of discussion above already to which I'd refer you.
Another thing to consider: survivability. With 30 ft range on those thrown attacks, the arty will be within range of many enemies' move and melee attacks, as well as ranged, aoe, and spell attacks. Perhaps incorporating evasion/uncanny would be a solution, but I would think thematically some form of armor or shield would be better. Say for instance the mechanic is the same as uncanny dodge, but instead it looks like a shield that telescopes out of a bracer or something.
Allow the vials to be used as sling bullets for additional range. That's what I was planning in case my player decided to go the Alchemist route.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Welcome to the Grand Illusion, come on in and see what's happening, pay the price, get your ticket for the show....
So this is an idea of a laser below should are the details on making this magnificent contraption.
So this is going off of DMG based ingredients and magic items. I'd really appreciate comments or feedback on this idea as I'm trying to convince my DM that allowing me to modify the Thunder Cannon isn't going to make the class OP. As it stands I think the gunsmith is on the weak side, but for the modification and a few other ideas I've been tossing around on paper and in my head.
Laser Sight Mod. (+1/+2/+3) Shots made from the Gun with this modification Ignore Half Cover. [This puts the item inline with a Wand of the War Mage] Requires Attunement
Requirements for +1 1 - lb of Silver - 5gp 1 - Cantrip Scroll of Light - 50gp 1 - Ruby/Emerald - 400gp 455gp required
Requirements for +2 1 - lb of Silver - 5gp 1 - Cantrip Scroll of Light - 50gp 1 - Ruby/Emerald - 1500 1 - Scroll of Magic Weapon +2 (Spell slot 4) - 2500gp 4055gp required
Requirements for +3 1 - lb of Silver - 5gp 1 - Cantrip Scroll of Light - 50gp 1 - Ruby/Emerald - 3000 1 - Scroll of Magic Weapon +3 (Spell slot 6) - 25000gp 28055gp required
This all said and done above I think things need to be consider to not make the gun to strong by equiping to many + mods to it.
So I'm proposing the following,
Thunder Cannon Modification guide lines. The Thunder Cannon can never have more than 3 mods attached as the weapon would become unwieldy. Modifications cannot give more than 2 magical bonuses. Example: Ignoring half cover, or shots made at ranges great than 150 do not suffer disadvantage (scope mod) Modifications that give magical bonuses require attunement Modifications that give just + hit/dmg do not require attunement just like their counter parts. Example: Weapon +1/+2/+3 Modifications cannot give more than a +3 value to the Thunder Cannon. This means you can't have 3 modifications giving +2, the total of all modifications attached cannot exceed a total bonus of +3 between all mods.
These limitations are to help keep the weapon in line with other magical items that typical weapons have options too. As well as have people consider what they are doing with their attunement slots.
The above doesn't stop a Gunsmith from modifying their Arcane Magazine to having + Hit/Dmg values or magical buffs, similar to that of ammunition +1/+2/+3. The same rules from modifying the Thunder Cannon apply to modifying the Arcane Magazine.
The last part I'm considering is something called "Eureka Moments". The idea here is to reduce the amount of time required to craft these items. With rolling checks with tools.
So, if I were a DM, and I were worried about buffing the artificer, these would be my concerns: (keep them in mind when you are talking to your DM)
1) The Artificer, on-hit, roll rolls a lot of dice... (arty level/2) +2d6). To put this damage in perspective, a great-axe fighter rolls almost exactly 1/2 as many d12 dice at most levels (and a longsword fighter rolls as many). This means a couple of things. a) that the artificer's average damage is a approximately equal to a fighter succeeding at every attack he makes each round, when the artificer succeeds on a single attack. b) Therefore, assuming you interperate the artificer as being a kind-of ranged fighter type your ideal hit ratio should match the fighters (comparing him to a ranger or bard is more difficult.)
2) Players in my game being able to grant themselves magical items. In my games, magical items are generated more-or-less at random. Everybody wants to either buff their stats, or buff their damages, but sometimes its good to hold the best stuff out of reach. Makes for a decent side-quest.. also makes for more interesting stories when you hand out situational equipment. A DM who especially isn't experienced with the artificer class could be very hesitant to simply allow you to buff the class beyond RAW.
3) complicated equipment that does multiple things. It's a lot easier to ask for a simple +1 scope than a +1 scope that allows you to ignore cover and turns your bullets into bees.
______
Some Ideas that I have re: how to improve the GS, are below. Giving your DM multiple options can sometimes disguise the fact that you are asking for a favor ; )
1) Giving the gunslinger more Wonderous Invention slots, and then making buildable GS artifiacts that fall into this category (so you can give up your robe of useful items for a simple +1 scope or Xray scope that lets you ignore cover and see through walls or whatever) IMO there's lots of room in the artificer class for more WI slots and choices without unbalancing things too much. This is also how I recommend balancing out the mech into the late game.
2) Giving the artificer a spell like faery fire (and calling it a tracer) so that you can sack a turn to setup vs the tougher monsters, giving you the ability to hit the big bad, while keeping your + to hit lower than the fighter and ranger classes overall. The artificer's + to hit isn't bad, and like I said above, an artificer that can guarantee every hit is going to outdamage a straight fighter, because a straight fighter has to roll successfully 2-8x to match dice (other bonus's not withstanding)
_____________________________________________
All that being said, in relation to your DIRECT comment,
1) There is a loophole built in: You can attach 3 lvl 1 mods for 1200gp and turn your gun into a +3.
2) I don't think stacking 3 multi-effect enchantments as described would be fair to any class, even if they are mostly grappling hooks, displacement charms and smoke grenades, partly because it overpowers the one single item(that always happens to be in your hands and might even be your spell focus too...), but more-so because it allows the artificer to basically convert cash into virtually any magic item he wants, and then just attach it to a gun as a mod.
3) I personally come from the school that you should have to give up something in order to get something (not just money) so I'd probably require 3 ingredients for any(scope mod/barrel mod/trigger mod) and then require you to give up another magic item with effects similar to the ones that you would like the gun to duplicate (eg a lightnig javelin to get a thunder-shot) I would then have you roll, and then, depending on the roll your new cannon might do anything from a targeted radius AOE lightning strike (good roll) to a trigger mechanism that gives you a mild shock every time you pull the trigger (bad roll). On complicated effects, I might have you roll 2x, once to break down the item into it's core components, and again to forge them into a new item/component.
4) A rule that says "scope mods effect accuracy, barrel mods effect range and power and trigger mods trigger special effects, etc" would be reasonable. If applied, then the same lightning javelin might combine into a scope that allows bullets to "flash through" obstacles, walls and shields, that adds lightning damage to the on-hit, or triggers a special attack as described above, depending on what type of component you were trying to duplicate/improve upon.
5) One thing you didn't mention is tools. Now, I know that the artificer gets like 4 sets of tools (and expertise with 3 of them), but it's worth noting that, you should also have Jeweler's tools for gemcrafting/polish work, Tinkerer's tools to assemble/disassemble your firearm, Smiths tools to forge metal. If you don't have those 3 tool-sets (and your DM is free to impose on this list anything he wants, mystic's supplies, or an engineering kit, for instance) then you'll either be at disadvantage to craft, or you just won't be able to craft it at all, so it bears mentioning/consideration.
6) I would probably reserve judgement on arcane magazine mods, and implement that as a separate change at a later time. My first inclination is that (where I would go with this) is quantity of ammo, but realistically, that's useless unless your DM wants to nerf the RAW 40 shot magazine so that the expanded magazines would be worthwhile (not necessary; not an unreasonable alteration either). There is a practical difference between finding a half-used quiver of +2/2 arrows, and generating +2/2 ammo on command, though, so I doubt I'd let you upgrade your magazine to produce magic ammo unless I was fairly confident in your supply chain (and enter thematic re-skinning rules)
1: First up it isn't Artificer level /2 +2d6, it caps out at 9d6 ultimately 1d6 short of Rogue which is your Rogue level / 2. And comparing it to great-axe fighter is incredibly misleading as the Artifcer is an all or nothing attack. If it misses congratulations you got nothing, where as a great axe fighter only needs to hit once at that point to change those averages. Statistically the great weapon fighter should be making more hits maybe with less damage but missing once isn't going to sink it. Second point to that is that if it went battle master congratulations it can now increase it's potential to hit with maneuvers, or finding a + Weapon, further setting the gap ever wider. Also rerolling a 1 or 2 for dmg.
2: Everything I proposed about how to make the magical item is RAW. And given the components a good DM should be able to see from what I wrote how there are plenty of plot hooks potentials there. (pg 129 DMG, and magic item prices pg 135 DMG)
3: Wand of the War Mage (pg 212 DMG)
You next two points have some interesting potential and have sparked ideas in my head.
The first is an interesting idea but I'm not really sold on having more is better but maybe an expanded list of options. I tend to agree with what others have said either here or on reddit that the current list is rather lack luster with only few actual decent options.
The second one though I think is even more interesting when you consider the potential of the arcane magazine, because I do agree a replenishing bag of + hit/dmg bullets would be insanely strong.
But where your point falls apart completely is in your statement of keeping the hit for the artificer down. Where all it can do is shoot, it has an insanely poor spell list, and it's only thing is shooting, gimping this gives the class what? This isn't to mention that the action economy is also terrible for the artificer if you cast a spell not attacking. And you're willfully ignoring the fact that a fighter has the potential with maneuvers, hit points, and a higher AC giving it more utility. If you even look at the ranger it has more utility with it's spells than the Artificer. Also giving the artificer that one spell of fearie fire doesn't clear the issue of why not just play a spell casting class then? The Gunsmith has been built around the idea of their weapon. But your comments seem insanely contradictory of supporting that method of game play. It is very clear that at higher levels when the game progresses the gun will have significant drop off when compared to the potential of classes.
edit: I want to note that you further up on this page also mention that the + hit is a problem, but still want it to be one?
------------------------ 1: Yes I agree this is an fortunate side effect, but not without comparable other cases of magic items. As well each mod is still taking an attunement slot. So for a plus 3 to be gained like this you are likely giving up at least 2 attunement possibly 3. Now then for my case for this, Lets consider a warlock, Wand of the War Mage + Rod of the Pact Keeper yes this is +2 with two incredible buffs as well but I'm sure you could find another option in there flush this out. The main point here I'm making is that the weapon options are nil, zero, for artificer and that what I proposed is a mechanic to offer a solution working within the realm of the Artificer. While attempting to create some balance. Gun as I see it isn't just like any other weapon it is a much in line with a spell casters ability to cast spells and have magical items modify their spells damage, saving throws, and DCs.
2: Stop thinking of these modifications as just 1 object, as I stated these should be considered as other attuneable magic items that are being designed as a way to fill a very clear void for the artificer. I get that it is hard if you are rolling from a table for magic items to players but even then a good dm just doesn't give their players useless items after useless items. I also outline limitations on magical buffs as well and how they can be used if they are being used in conjunction with the thunder cannon
3: Using a magic item is entirely an option, and is a nice addition if it makes sense for what the player is trying to create, the artificer at the end of the day is an engineer. I think some simple like the item I proposed is well considered in both value, time, and requirements to make. I agree as well when making an item the materials should be considered and make sense this is something the DMG outlines well.
4: Certainly sounds interesting and I'd like your perspective on that item how it would work and possible other solutions. From first read it sounds incredibly strong, but also could be very fun.
5: Tools can always be considered there is also a lot of opportunity for a good DM to say you can try this yourself, you can learn to use the tools to gain that proficiency, or find a good NPC. In most large cities I'm sure you would find a quality gem smith which could cost some gold to get the work done or maybe a side quest potential here as well.
6: I think I mentioned this already but I agree the magazine is touchy as having an infinite supply of + hit/dmg ammo is scary. But one thing that came to mind was getting silvered bullets. Or infusing a magic weapon scroll to infuse into the arcane magazine all the ammo for a period of time is +X depending on the spell infused. Outside of these I'm not sure, using a fearie fire spell to infuse the ammo where you maybe have a number of these shots the bag produces and now we have your tracer round. It could be a DC 8 + Prof + Your intelligence modifier saving throw. This round could replace the thunder monger bonus damage. But if the target is hit it still takes 2d6 damage. I'm going to explore this a bit more.
He actually is a Buffer (enlarge/reduce, sanctuary, longstrider, blur, shield of faith, enhance ability, magic weapon, stoneskin, etc) And, not only is he a Buffer, He is also potentially a more powerful one because of his ability to cast "self" targeting spells on allies; and do so without wasting an action in combat. (Interacting with a pre-made token would be a free action, or you can hand out the tokens before a fight like goodberries) He also has limited healing abilities.
He can't wild-shape, sure, but he has an iron gollum following him around which does do melee, does have multiattack, has more HP than anything on either the druid or ranger's lists and is out and out more powerful until level 10-15 or so (arguable). You can ride it into battle like a mount(if you are a medium or smaller creature). You get defensive attacks of opportunity with flanking bonuses if you position it correctly, or else you can use it like a semi disposable meat shield. Either way, he's not helpless.
He's also packed with out-of-combat utility, which is fairly obviously where he shines.
As for "he's a shooter, that's all he is, he can't do anything else" This is true, but so what? Why on earth do you want to put a 2handed greataxe in his hand in the first place? His gun has a 150' range. Like I said, if you WANT to play a fighter, go play a fighter. I'm not saying he's OP, I'm saying that I LIKE the variety and diversity his class brings to the game, and I don't feel the need to give him 4x10d6 smites per round. His DPS is at a good level(or at least it's close), and the areas that he needs buffed are elsewhere. (like his spell pool and his + to hit)
Edit: 8/10
You don't need to drop the gun to interact with other objects. Like a longbow, you can hold it in one hand, and, like any weapon, you can choose to drop it or "sheath" it (sling it over your shoulder). The only reason that you would drop it instead of holstering it, is that you wanted to draw a melee weapon and attack with it in a single turn. Which is where your bayonet idea becomes problematic because it would turn your thundercannon into a melee/150'/500' spear that smites at range. IMO, this should cost something. Perhaps all it costs is time and materials in-game? Perhaps it's a class specific feat? Perhaps a Wonderous Invention slot? I don't know, BUT in the context of the game I see no reason why the artificer should just be able to brawl with his gun by default. As simple of a concept as a bayonet is, there is a reason that the longbow can't simply be used like an improvised quarterstaff. Think of it this way, your gun is a delicate magical object that wasn't designed to be used like a club or a sword. You don't want to bash it against shields and then run off and pull that trigger because the gun might explode! You want to protect that gun, it's your life! A bayonet is more than sticking a knife into the barrel of a blunderbuss, it's reinforcing the entire weapon, changing it's balance, and ultimately making it resilient enough that you can use it to parry a blow without killing yourself.
If I WERE going to give the farm away for free, it would be more of a thematic reskinning. Eg: on your turn you can sheath your gun and sling it over your shoulder (free action) and draw a long-sword (main action) by RAW. So, if you wanted, I would allow you to have a bayonet, but drawing it and attaching it to your gun would take a whole round just like it does now. I wouldn't grant you proficiency (unless you had proficiency with longswords, which you don't by default) and it would be str based, rather than dex. Removing the bayonet and putting it away, would also take an action, although you could drop the bayonet if you wanted. In my opinion, by RAW, this is already explicitly allowed and any DM would have a hard time arguing against it.
I like a bayonet idea because back when I was playing pathfinder, I loved the Gunslinger. I was playing a Dwarf Gunslinger with a decent strength score (16 I think). There is some situations where a melee attack is a better option. I can also use a bayonet as a dagger. But on a musket it becomes a spear. Buts that is pathfinder this is 5th ed.
You can't have a longsword. You can't even have a rapier. The best weapon you can have, if you're gonna have to melee, is a quarterstaff, and that's two handed to get a d8.
Meanwhile, you cannot sheathe a weapon and draw one and attack in the same turn, unless you have the Dual Wielding feat. You can drop a weapon and draw one and attack, But sheathing one is interacting with an object, and drawing one is interacting with an object, and you can't interact with two objects in one turn without the feat.
You could hold the gun in one hand and melee with the other, of course. But once you have gotten out of melee contact, You'll either have to drop your sword or spend the next turn sheathing it before you can shoot anything. Meanwhile, there's no reason whatsoever that the bayonet could not be permanently affixed to the gun. I don't want a greataxe; I just don't want to have to drop a weapon when forced to fight. And a bayonet on the gun being a spear is not OP. Meanwhile, fragile object, pfft. It's a gun. It's not magical when it was created. It fires magical bullets later on, though.
And changing the 'balance"? Not with any bayonet on any of the many long arms I have ever handled. You know how much an arquebus weighs?
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
Indeed. Having used your free action to sheathe your gun, you then take your action to Use An Object, which was DRAWING the sword. That WAS YOUR ACTION. You are now done. Your Action was to Use An Object. Rather than Attack, which is also an action. Attack and Use An Object are NOT the same action. You do one or the other. You cannot sheathe AND draw AND attack in the same turn. Unless you have the Dual Wielding feat.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
In Sage Advice - an authoritative source - it says: "On your turn, you can interact with one object for free, either during your move or during an action (PH, 190). One of the most common object interactions is drawing or stowing a weapon. Interacting with a second object on the same turn requires an action. You need a feature like the Dual Wielder feat to draw or stow a second weapon for free."
Sorry about that, there it is.
You CAN have a longsword, you just don't get proficiency. You still get whatever your + to hit is, just not proficiency... and, if you want to be that kind of artificer, you can always go elf. Elves make great artificers and get martial training... Otherwise, yeah, shortsword d6, scimitar d6 (finesse) or quarterstaff 2h d8, which again, I don't have a problem with. Artificers AREN'T trained in martial combat by default. That Proficiency comes from somewhere.
I don't understand your second paragraph. You seem to be disagreeing with me, but you are just repeating what I said... Yes, the only reason that you would drop the gun, instead of sheathing it, is because you wanted to draw and attack in the same turn. Somehow, 5 posts later, I think we all can agree on that point. Nevertheless, that is your decision. You don't HAVE TO play the artificer that way, I agree it's inefficient and awkward, and requires you to invest (something) to get something. That's life.
I didn't mean that adding a bayonet would change the balance of the gun, I meant that if you were to re-design your gun to be well-suited to polearm combat, you would ideally want to change the balance, so that you can hold it easier. That said, it's fluff, regardless. Make up your own fluff, if you don't like mine. The point is you don't need a longsword/gun, and if you DO need a Longsword/Gun, then great, that's what feats and roleplay, and racial choice is for.
Personally, I think there is plenty of room for a kickass class-specific feat here (and you should look at close-quarter shooter because it comes ready made and it's flatly better), but I do think it should cost you a feat, if you aren't willing to settle for a dagger or scimitar. I might come up with something like this:
Grizzled
Increase the range of your thunder-cannon to 200'/650'
You have permanently fixed a bayonet to the front of your thunder cannon that can be used for melee combat. The new thundercannon is does 1d6 piercing melee damage and has the finesse property. You are proficient with all aspects of your new thunder cannon.
When you successfully make a melee' attack utilizing this feature, you may attempt to pull the trigger and deal additional damage. Make a melee spell attack utilizing your intelligence stat, if successful, you may roll 1d4 fire damage for each 2 artificer levels you have, rounded down.
So 1) Gunblade. Nerdgasm. Moving on.
2) A second type of damage! ZOMG. So needed.
3) Not limited to JUST a melee improvement.
Now that was a great comment.
I like the melee stab and shoot combo Diplomacy. I have rolled up a 5th level dwarf gunsmith and took Crossbow expert as a feat. I could re flavor it to look like I'm in melee with a bayonet.
I've been playing around with the idea of allowing the Artificer player in my campaign to use his mechanical servant as a Mech. Like a Gundam or RIFTS style Glitter Boy. It will be a while before he gets it built, he's only level 2 at the moment (and I'm known for slow advancements) so I have plenty of time to figure out how I would make it work fairly.
Welcome to the Grand Illusion, come on in and see what's happening, pay the price, get your ticket for the show....
Mounted Combatant
You are a dangerous foe to face while mounted. While you are mounted and aren’t incapacitated, you gain the following benefits:
There you go. Have him pick up the mounted combatant feet, and I'd say you're done. He's sitting pretty in his mech.
So a bit of a side question, but can still fall into this area.
Spell casting focus'
Does the artificer require one?
If so what kinds are you players or characters using?
I'm looking for ways to avoid having the War Caster Feat. (Alchemist/Gunslinger solutions)
I use the gun. It is what he generally has in his hands pretty much all the time.
I assumed that the artificer needed one, since there is a whole section in the UA regarding spell-casting focus. I however went the long route and proceeded to procure the actual ingredients for my spells separately...
As long as you have a free hand, you should be able to perform the somatic portion of a spell. I would only worry about war caster for someone who either has 2 weapons, or a weapon and a shield. That being said, the artificer is kindof specialized to NOT do combat magic. If you are casting your spells mid fight, rather than before hand, you are being less efficient than you could be.
I would like to see the alchemical formulas have expanded versatility. More buffing options and more diversity of damage types and more battlefield control types. I think quantity limits could balance this out (rather than the once per long rest mechanic seen in the healing draught,) perhaps arty lvl + int mod vials per short rest or something? I would also like to see them function similar to hail of thorns- insofaras the initial hit is a ranged attack (or ranged spell attack) while anything w/in 5ft makes a Dex save for all or nothing dmg.
Another thing to consider: survivability. With 30 ft range on those thrown attacks, the arty will be within range of many enemies' move and melee attacks, as well as ranged, aoe, and spell attacks. Perhaps incorporating evasion/uncanny would be a solution, but I would think thematically some form of armor or shield would be better. Say for instance the mechanic is the same as uncanny dodge, but instead it looks like a shield that telescopes out of a bracer or something.
As for the construct, I would suggest it at least gets a hit die like any pc, and also that the arty can spend some gold and downtime, at certain level increases, to construct 'reinforced armor plating' to increase its AC. If a flying creature template is used for a flying mount, the 30 ft thrown range on alchemy vials will need to be adjusted. My suggestion would be an Int-based proficiency attack (as the arty would need to be calculating airspeed, windspeed, aerodynamics, etc for their 'bombing run'), with a defined range increment like any other range weapon.
Also, I would think the wondrous item feature implies the ability to replace/repair said items, as it says the arty 'crafted' the item. (Also implied by the arty's ability to craft, and then repair/replace the construct companion.) I'd include a gold/time element to be sure, but what artificer wouldn't take notes and have a set of blueprints/instructions from their initial efforts?
As for the gunsmith, it seems to be the more powerful/popular choice and there's already quite a lot of discussion above already to which I'd refer you.
Welcome to the Grand Illusion, come on in and see what's happening, pay the price, get your ticket for the show....
Laser Modification
So this is an idea of a laser below should are the details on making this magnificent contraption.
So this is going off of DMG based ingredients and magic items.
I'd really appreciate comments or feedback on this idea as I'm trying to convince my DM that allowing me to modify the Thunder Cannon isn't going to make the class OP.
As it stands I think the gunsmith is on the weak side, but for the modification and a few other ideas I've been tossing around on paper and in my head.
Laser Sight Mod. (+1/+2/+3) Shots made from the Gun with this modification Ignore Half Cover. [This puts the item inline with a Wand of the War Mage] Requires Attunement
Requirements for +1
1 - lb of Silver - 5gp
1 - Cantrip Scroll of Light - 50gp
1 - Ruby/Emerald - 400gp
455gp required
Requirements for +2
1 - lb of Silver - 5gp
1 - Cantrip Scroll of Light - 50gp
1 - Ruby/Emerald - 1500
1 - Scroll of Magic Weapon +2 (Spell slot 4) - 2500gp
4055gp required
Requirements for +3
1 - lb of Silver - 5gp
1 - Cantrip Scroll of Light - 50gp
1 - Ruby/Emerald - 3000
1 - Scroll of Magic Weapon +3 (Spell slot 6) - 25000gp
28055gp required
This all said and done above I think things need to be consider to not make the gun to strong by equiping to many + mods to it.
So I'm proposing the following,
Thunder Cannon Modification guide lines.
The Thunder Cannon can never have more than 3 mods attached as the weapon would become unwieldy.
Modifications cannot give more than 2 magical bonuses. Example: Ignoring half cover, or shots made at ranges great than 150 do not suffer disadvantage (scope mod)
Modifications that give magical bonuses require attunement
Modifications that give just + hit/dmg do not require attunement just like their counter parts. Example: Weapon +1/+2/+3
Modifications cannot give more than a +3 value to the Thunder Cannon. This means you can't have 3 modifications giving +2, the total of all modifications attached cannot exceed a total bonus of +3 between all mods.
These limitations are to help keep the weapon in line with other magical items that typical weapons have options too. As well as have people consider what they are doing with their attunement slots.
The above doesn't stop a Gunsmith from modifying their Arcane Magazine to having + Hit/Dmg values or magical buffs, similar to that of ammunition +1/+2/+3. The same rules from modifying the Thunder Cannon apply to modifying the Arcane Magazine.
The last part I'm considering is something called "Eureka Moments". The idea here is to reduce the amount of time required to craft these items. With rolling checks with tools.
So, if I were a DM, and I were worried about buffing the artificer, these would be my concerns: (keep them in mind when you are talking to your DM)
1) The Artificer, on-hit, roll rolls a lot of dice... (arty level/2) +2d6). To put this damage in perspective, a great-axe fighter rolls almost exactly 1/2 as many d12 dice at most levels (and a longsword fighter rolls as many). This means a couple of things. a) that the artificer's average damage is a approximately equal to a fighter succeeding at every attack he makes each round, when the artificer succeeds on a single attack. b) Therefore, assuming you interperate the artificer as being a kind-of ranged fighter type your ideal hit ratio should match the fighters (comparing him to a ranger or bard is more difficult.)
2) Players in my game being able to grant themselves magical items. In my games, magical items are generated more-or-less at random. Everybody wants to either buff their stats, or buff their damages, but sometimes its good to hold the best stuff out of reach. Makes for a decent side-quest.. also makes for more interesting stories when you hand out situational equipment. A DM who especially isn't experienced with the artificer class could be very hesitant to simply allow you to buff the class beyond RAW.
3) complicated equipment that does multiple things. It's a lot easier to ask for a simple +1 scope than a +1 scope that allows you to ignore cover and turns your bullets into bees.
______
Some Ideas that I have re: how to improve the GS, are below. Giving your DM multiple options can sometimes disguise the fact that you are asking for a favor ; )
1) Giving the gunslinger more Wonderous Invention slots, and then making buildable GS artifiacts that fall into this category (so you can give up your robe of useful items for a simple +1 scope or Xray scope that lets you ignore cover and see through walls or whatever) IMO there's lots of room in the artificer class for more WI slots and choices without unbalancing things too much. This is also how I recommend balancing out the mech into the late game.
2) Giving the artificer a spell like faery fire (and calling it a tracer) so that you can sack a turn to setup vs the tougher monsters, giving you the ability to hit the big bad, while keeping your + to hit lower than the fighter and ranger classes overall. The artificer's + to hit isn't bad, and like I said above, an artificer that can guarantee every hit is going to outdamage a straight fighter, because a straight fighter has to roll successfully 2-8x to match dice (other bonus's not withstanding)
_____________________________________________
All that being said, in relation to your DIRECT comment,
1) There is a loophole built in: You can attach 3 lvl 1 mods for 1200gp and turn your gun into a +3.
2) I don't think stacking 3 multi-effect enchantments as described would be fair to any class, even if they are mostly grappling hooks, displacement charms and smoke grenades, partly because it overpowers the one single item(that always happens to be in your hands and might even be your spell focus too...), but more-so because it allows the artificer to basically convert cash into virtually any magic item he wants, and then just attach it to a gun as a mod.
3) I personally come from the school that you should have to give up something in order to get something (not just money) so I'd probably require 3 ingredients for any (scope mod/barrel mod/trigger mod) and then require you to give up another magic item with effects similar to the ones that you would like the gun to duplicate (eg a lightnig javelin to get a thunder-shot) I would then have you roll, and then, depending on the roll your new cannon might do anything from a targeted radius AOE lightning strike (good roll) to a trigger mechanism that gives you a mild shock every time you pull the trigger (bad roll). On complicated effects, I might have you roll 2x, once to break down the item into it's core components, and again to forge them into a new item/component.
4) A rule that says "scope mods effect accuracy, barrel mods effect range and power and trigger mods trigger special effects, etc" would be reasonable. If applied, then the same lightning javelin might combine into a scope that allows bullets to "flash through" obstacles, walls and shields, that adds lightning damage to the on-hit, or triggers a special attack as described above, depending on what type of component you were trying to duplicate/improve upon.
5) One thing you didn't mention is tools. Now, I know that the artificer gets like 4 sets of tools (and expertise with 3 of them), but it's worth noting that, you should also have Jeweler's tools for gemcrafting/polish work, Tinkerer's tools to assemble/disassemble your firearm, Smiths tools to forge metal. If you don't have those 3 tool-sets (and your DM is free to impose on this list anything he wants, mystic's supplies, or an engineering kit, for instance) then you'll either be at disadvantage to craft, or you just won't be able to craft it at all, so it bears mentioning/consideration.
6) I would probably reserve judgement on arcane magazine mods, and implement that as a separate change at a later time. My first inclination is that (where I would go with this) is quantity of ammo, but realistically, that's useless unless your DM wants to nerf the RAW 40 shot magazine so that the expanded magazines would be worthwhile (not necessary; not an unreasonable alteration either). There is a practical difference between finding a half-used quiver of +2/2 arrows, and generating +2/2 ammo on command, though, so I doubt I'd let you upgrade your magazine to produce magic ammo unless I was fairly confident in your supply chain (and enter thematic re-skinning rules)
1: First up it isn't Artificer level /2 +2d6, it caps out at 9d6 ultimately 1d6 short of Rogue which is your Rogue level / 2. And comparing it to great-axe fighter is incredibly misleading as the Artifcer is an all or nothing attack. If it misses congratulations you got nothing, where as a great axe fighter only needs to hit once at that point to change those averages. Statistically the great weapon fighter should be making more hits maybe with less damage but missing once isn't going to sink it. Second point to that is that if it went battle master congratulations it can now increase it's potential to hit with maneuvers, or finding a + Weapon, further setting the gap ever wider. Also rerolling a 1 or 2 for dmg.
2: Everything I proposed about how to make the magical item is RAW. And given the components a good DM should be able to see from what I wrote how there are plenty of plot hooks potentials there. (pg 129 DMG, and magic item prices pg 135 DMG)
3: Wand of the War Mage (pg 212 DMG)
You next two points have some interesting potential and have sparked ideas in my head.
The first is an interesting idea but I'm not really sold on having more is better but maybe an expanded list of options. I tend to agree with what others have said either here or on reddit that the current list is rather lack luster with only few actual decent options.
The second one though I think is even more interesting when you consider the potential of the arcane magazine, because I do agree a replenishing bag of + hit/dmg bullets would be insanely strong.
But where your point falls apart completely is in your statement of keeping the hit for the artificer down. Where all it can do is shoot, it has an insanely poor spell list, and it's only thing is shooting, gimping this gives the class what? This isn't to mention that the action economy is also terrible for the artificer if you cast a spell not attacking. And you're willfully ignoring the fact that a fighter has the potential with maneuvers, hit points, and a higher AC giving it more utility. If you even look at the ranger it has more utility with it's spells than the Artificer. Also giving the artificer that one spell of fearie fire doesn't clear the issue of why not just play a spell casting class then? The Gunsmith has been built around the idea of their weapon. But your comments seem insanely contradictory of supporting that method of game play. It is very clear that at higher levels when the game progresses the gun will have significant drop off when compared to the potential of classes.
edit: I want to note that you further up on this page also mention that the + hit is a problem, but still want it to be one?
------------------------
1: Yes I agree this is an fortunate side effect, but not without comparable other cases of magic items. As well each mod is still taking an attunement slot. So for a plus 3 to be gained like this you are likely giving up at least 2 attunement possibly 3. Now then for my case for this, Lets consider a warlock, Wand of the War Mage + Rod of the Pact Keeper yes this is +2 with two incredible buffs as well but I'm sure you could find another option in there flush this out. The main point here I'm making is that the weapon options are nil, zero, for artificer and that what I proposed is a mechanic to offer a solution working within the realm of the Artificer. While attempting to create some balance. Gun as I see it isn't just like any other weapon it is a much in line with a spell casters ability to cast spells and have magical items modify their spells damage, saving throws, and DCs.
2: Stop thinking of these modifications as just 1 object, as I stated these should be considered as other attuneable magic items that are being designed as a way to fill a very clear void for the artificer. I get that it is hard if you are rolling from a table for magic items to players but even then a good dm just doesn't give their players useless items after useless items. I also outline limitations on magical buffs as well and how they can be used if they are being used in conjunction with the thunder cannon
3: Using a magic item is entirely an option, and is a nice addition if it makes sense for what the player is trying to create, the artificer at the end of the day is an engineer. I think some simple like the item I proposed is well considered in both value, time, and requirements to make. I agree as well when making an item the materials should be considered and make sense this is something the DMG outlines well.
4: Certainly sounds interesting and I'd like your perspective on that item how it would work and possible other solutions. From first read it sounds incredibly strong, but also could be very fun.
5: Tools can always be considered there is also a lot of opportunity for a good DM to say you can try this yourself, you can learn to use the tools to gain that proficiency, or find a good NPC. In most large cities I'm sure you would find a quality gem smith which could cost some gold to get the work done or maybe a side quest potential here as well.
6: I think I mentioned this already but I agree the magazine is touchy as having an infinite supply of + hit/dmg ammo is scary. But one thing that came to mind was getting silvered bullets. Or infusing a magic weapon scroll to infuse into the arcane magazine all the ammo for a period of time is +X depending on the spell infused. Outside of these I'm not sure, using a fearie fire spell to infuse the ammo where you maybe have a number of these shots the bag produces and now we have your tracer round. It could be a DC 8 + Prof + Your intelligence modifier saving throw. This round could replace the thunder monger bonus damage. But if the target is hit it still takes 2d6 damage. I'm going to explore this a bit more.