1) actually its 11d6. 9d6 is thunder damage, 2d6 is piercing, and then there is potentially another 2-3 attacks by the artificial construct that I didn't count for simplicity (for my griffon it was 2d6 Slashing and 1d8 piercing). But you are right, it's not the actual formula. just a rough rule of thumb...
2) yes, I know, but you have to look at the class in terms of averages. If you miss 25% of your attacks, and the fighter misses the same, then you are doing the same damage. Not misleading at all, even though it feelsbadman to roll once and then do nothing for a whole round, or even two. It's not unreasonable to look at the classes comparatively, and it's even not unreasonable to expect the fighter to outdamage the ranger because you have the advantage of distance (and potentially a flying mount). Compare it to an actual ranger or a fighter with a bow and the artificer is quite good.
The artificer + to hit isn't "******." +4 at level 1/ +8 by level 12 /+11 to hit at lvl 20. Bounded accuracy. Tweaking the + to hit is something that should be at the DM's discretion. The artificer also gets 4 sets of tools, a bonus construct PC and magic, so I think it's rather nonsense when people say "oh, he has nothing to offer."
___
1) well at low levels 3 attunement slots are nothing, since you don't have anything else to attune anyway and the artificer actually gets extra slots. +3 magic weapons at level 5 for 1200GP is more than just fortunate, it's game breaking.
1b) I think that you missed the part of my whole thing was that my main concern with this change is that it turns magic items into an at-will comodity. if you HAVE a rod of the war mage, by all means try to invent a "scope of the war mage" using that as a component, and a couple of rolls. Whether or not you come across a 'rod of the war mage' though, or whether he makes you roll to "reconstruct" it into something else that's up to your DM.
2) Well but here's the thing, you are combining these into 1 item. This isn't a thematic re-skin, Wand of the War Mage gives a bonus to spell attack rolls, and while it is a clear example of an item that might be useless to an artificer, there are items that aren't useless. A variety of armors, helms, necklaces, poisons, potions.
3) Again, using a magic item, and creating, then combining 2-5 items into 1 super-item that does 10 things are 2 completely different ideas. It's the small difference of putting down your gun, and pulling out the magic thorn whip vs simply having everything built in, but yeah, absolutely, if you cross-polinate that +2 whip and that cloak of displacement with a gun that does 11d6 per round, then yeah, I start getting worried.
1) actually its 11d6. 9d6 is thunder damage, 2d6 is piercing, and then there is potentially another 2-3 attacks by the artificial construct that I didn't count for simplicity (for my griffon it was 2d6 Slashing and 1d8 piercing). But you are right, it's not the actual formula. just a rough rule of thumb...
2) yes, I know, but you have to look at the class in terms of averages. If you miss 25% of your attacks, and the fighter misses the same, then you are doing the same damage. Not misleading at all, even though it feelsbadman to roll once and then do nothing for a whole round, or even two. It's not unreasonable to look at the classes comparatively, and it's even not unreasonable to expect the fighter to outdamage the ranger because you have the advantage of distance (and potentially a flying mount). Compare it to an actual ranger or a fighter with a bow and the artificer is quite good.
The artificer + to hit isn't "******." +4 at level 1/ +8 by level 12 /+11 to hit at lvl 20. Bounded accuracy. Tweaking the + to hit is something that should be at the DM's discretion. The artificer also gets 4 sets of tools, a bonus construct PC and magic, so I think it's rather nonsense when people say "oh, he has nothing to offer."
___
1) well at low levels 3 attunement slots are nothing, since you don't have anything else to attune anyway and the artificer actually gets extra slots. +3 magic weapons at level 5 for 1200GP is more than just fortunate, it's game breaking.
1b) I think that you missed the part of my whole thing was that my main concern with this change is that it turns magic items into an at-will comodity. if you HAVE a rod of the war mage, by all means try to invent a "scope of the war mage" using that as a component, and a couple of rolls. Whether or not you come across a 'rod of the war mage' though, or whether he makes you roll to "reconstruct" it into something else that's up to your DM.
2) Well but here's the thing, you are combining these into 1 item. This isn't a thematic re-skin, Wand of the War Mage gives a bonus to spell attack rolls, and while it is a clear example of an item that might be useless to an artificer, there are items that aren't useless. A variety of armors, helms, necklaces, poisons, potions.
3) Again, using a magic item, and creating, then combining 2-5 items into 1 super-item that does 10 things are 2 completely different ideas. It's the small difference of putting down your gun, and pulling out the magic thorn whip vs simply having everything built in, but yeah, absolutely, if you cross-polinate that +2 whip and that cloak of displacement with a gun that does 11d6 per round, then yeah, I start getting worried.
Most of what you're talking about sounds like an artifact to me.
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
"Select a Large beast with a challenge rating of 2 or less.The servant uses that beast’s gamestatistics, but it can look however you like, as long as its form is appropriate for its statistics."
The attacks from said construct are ok early but 3 - 4 levels later drop of significantly has the thing has a good potential to be one shotted. You have even said the thing has significant issues with scaling. I personally am on the fence with that because the construct over some kind of utility but agree that it has problems. Of which you can try correcting with magic item or crafting. But that flair that you keep tossing back as where it shines you have seemingly found ways to make it about as terrible and useless as possible.
I want to point out that a majority of your posts contradict each other immensely. You've cherry picked specific things you like flip flop between a homebrew and then qoute RAW left and right for things to support a point of view. While the whole time mine has been from RAW. Your posts that you use as points have a very good tendecy to blow things out of proportion to also push support to your point of view.
Point in case you last post states "3) Again, using a magic item, and creating, then combining 2-5 items into 1 super-item that does 10 things are 2 completely different ideas."
At no point in time has any of my post suggested anything of the sort. Where are you getting these ideas from? Lets at least attempt to be constructive here..
You also constantly compare the gun to a great axe, why? The weapon is a 1d12, not 2d6.
But moving on.
Addressing your number 2. You give the distict impression that the one thing the Artificer can do for damage shouldn't be as good or better than that of the Fighter. Why? The fighter is a jack of all master of nothing. Classes don't have to all do the same thing and I know this will get tossed back at me, but in this case when the gunsmiths source of damage contribution is it's gun at range then it should excel in this category. You have also said the class comes with no proficiency in long swords, rapiers, short swords or the sort, so after that damage should be the construct to which you have outlined as well doesn't scale.
Average attacks and misses, of 25% do not equal out to being roughly the same. Not even close, the fighter is going to be rerolling damage die of 1 and 2s also consistently ensuring a higher quality of damage.
But this a side I think it might come down to a difference in how we are perceiving this class.
I'm going to take your examples that you like to keep using. Fighter, Ranger, and the Artificer, and explain how I see them
Fighter: Hands down the simpliest and most forgiving class to play, as I said Jack of all trades master if only you completely gear it that way at which point he can be the most broken thing running around with all the extra ASI. 1d10 health, extra attacks are plenty, fighting stance(s) are available. Plenty of options to specialize the class moving away from that jack of all point of view.
Ranger: A mid to back line dps/support class. It has potential to engage in melee when it desires and has at it's disposal a fantastic spell list for both damage, crowd control, buffs, debuffs, and support. With half a spell list/slots. A moderate difficulty to play as one has far more options available to it. The class skills further improve utility into a varierty of potential options. Fantastic health options with a 1d10 extra attack here as well, fight stance options.
Artificer: 1 of 2 options, 1d8 for health (it's respectable), but given how the gunsmith tends to be more than a little MAD (Multi-Attribute Dependent, I'd go as far as saying it is on par with Monk). The class features are fairly shallow, but plays entirely to the idea that this class MAKES magic items and doesn't require a magic item to make one. The range of the gun is less than that of the longbow, 150/500 vs 150/600. The class has good out of combat potential with tools. sadly two are picked for you (Thieves/smiths tools[gunsmith] ). The class is all about having magic items, using magic items, and having them attuned.
The mechanical servant well . . . It's a thing, you can get creative with it but if you want a flying one it is going to weak so not likely riding it in combat. It can be a CR0 - CR2 LARGE BEAST only. Better hope the thing doesn't die to often where you can't retrieve the body because 1,000 gp rebuild cost adds up fast. The gun is also significantly more expensive than any other weapon to replace especially if take into consideration the magazine. You aren't just walking into a shop to buy one either over the counter.
Spells! It is a 1/3rd magic list, utility options are there, and yeah you can give coins away lets hope though your INT stat is good because other wise you won't be passing many around and some of the spells are going to be less effective. But if you sacraficed your DEX to have a better INT lets hope that doesn't effect how often you need to hit... Lets not forget that 80% of the spells are Actions, and/or require concentration (pretty sure 80% is on the low side). So Remember that whole MAD it is a good thing the class comes with a CON Saving throws because you sure are as hell going to need that if you get hit.
The above gets worse because if you want to make use of Two sub class abilities Blast Wave and Piercing Round, you need to be close. Admittedly the Blast wave is more of get out of face ability to get away but realistically you likely never want to be in that position to use it, and then Piercing Round, for a class that has these abilities based off of such a long range weapon it sure is putting you close into the fight. And in those situations where you can't avoid that don't worry I'm sure your team mates will understand why you shot them in the back.
Seeing as I'm touching on it lets just mention just how weak Explosive Round is for a level 17 ability. So at level 17 you can't even muster an aoe spell that compares to the lowest spell level casting of Fireball, granted it doesn't require a spell slot to use but still 4d8 fire dmg?
Lastly The above is also very dependent on having a good spell save DC so that INT stat better be top notch. Otherwise you're more than likely better of just shooting and hoping you don't miss.
1) well at low levels 3 attunement slots are nothing, since you don't have anything else to attune anyway and the artificer actually gets extra slots. +3 magic weapons at level 5 for 1200GP is more than just fortunate, it's game breaking.
This isn't likely to happen given the amount of time and cost of making an actual magical item. You need to be level 3 before you can even attempt it and then you do need to acquire the resources. It isn't just gold stop thinking of it that way. The player still needs to source the materials and then have a place to make the item. This isn't something that just poofs into existence. And honestly is a whole party going to simply be ok with this one player wanting to stop for 2 weeks to do this? How does stopping effect the story? A GOOD DM can balance this without the requirement of finding a magic item first to make a magic item. When the class can clearly make it's own items that it's just given to the player, if this was intended the whole Magic item list might as well be put into the options that this class can get because the charm of the class is allowing a creative player come up with potential magic items. Its the role of a GOOD DM to make sure they fit within the scope of balance and rules (RAW).
1b) I think that you missed the part of my whole thing was that my main concern with this change is that it turns magic items into an at-will comodity. if you HAVE a rod of the war mage, by all means try to invent a "scope of the war mage" using that as a component, and a couple of rolls. Whether or not you come across a 'rod of the war mage' though, or whether he makes you roll to "reconstruct" it into something else that's up to your DM.
Addressed above.
2) Well but here's the thing, you are combining these into 1 item. This isn't a thematic re-skin, Wand of the War Mage gives a bonus to spell attack rolls, and while it is a clear example of an item that mightWOULD be useless to an artificer, there are items that aren't useless. A variety of armors, helms, necklaces, poisons, potions. (I fixed the statement to better reflect what you were thinking but didn't want to admit to)
I'm attaching them to a weapon this is no difference than the mages hands being used to cast a fireball here, they can hold multiple items to change the effectiveness of their spells. The gunsmith has to approach this a little differently as it's hands are already holding the gun. Yeah sure those items exist, but if a player wants to use those tools and class outlined abilities to make something as RAW says they can why can't they? The wand of the war mage was given as an example of cost and value of what is being provided to base another item of magical creation off of. You also seem hung up on the idea that the only magic items the artificer should get are those given by the DM or those given from the class list. RAW States how magical items are made Page 128 of the DMG.
Wand of the War Mage (+1/+2/+3) (Uncommon/Rare/Very Rare) While holding this wand, you gain a bonus to spell attack rolls determined by the wands rarity. In addition you ignore half cover when making a spell attack.
How isn't the laser sight a re-skin of this? Laser Sight Mod. (+1/+2/+3) Shots made from the Gun with this modification Ignore Half Cover.
The item is being held attached to the weapon, it requires attunement, it matches the costs associated with an item of the same values. I could see the argument of only allows two magical items created in this manner to being used 1 for each hand that is supporting the weapon.
Just a note on the above comment that said, "but you have to look at the class in terms of averages. If you miss 25% of your attacks, and the fighter misses the same, then you are doing the same damage." Well, let's look at that, say, at level 5.
Over 4 turns, the artificer missies once (25%), let's say. So that's 3x 4d6, or an average of 42 points, not including his DEX bonus . Over 4 turns, the fighter (battlemaster) misses twice (25%), so, if he's wielding a d12 weapon that's 6x d12, or an average pf 42 points, not including his DEX bonus, and only if he uses no maneuver dice. If he's a dual wielder, he misses three times, and gets 9x d8, or 45 points, again not including his STR bonus and and only if he uses no maneuver dice. But when you add in three DEX bonuses vs. six STR bonuses, the difference starts to add up, and when you throw in the higher chance of crits given the ability to hit twice as often, then no, you cannot keep up with a fighter.
I'm not saying you should or should not be able to;. but they do NOT do the same damage.
Just a note on the above comment that said, "but you have to look at the class in terms of averages. If you miss 25% of your attacks, and the fighter misses the same, then you are doing the same damage." Well, let's look at that, say, at level 5.
Over 4 turns, the artificer missies once (25%), let's say. So that's 3x 4d6, or an average of 42 points, not including his DEX bonus . Over 4 turns, the fighter (battlemaster) misses twice (25%), so, if he's wielding a d12 weapon that's 6x d12, or an average pf 42 points, not including his DEX bonus, and only if he uses no maneuver dice. If he's a dual wielder, he misses three times, and gets 9x d8, or 45 points, again not including his STR bonus and and only if he uses no maneuver dice. But when you add in three DEX bonuses vs. six STR bonuses, the difference starts to add up, and when you throw in the higher chance of crits given the ability to hit twice as often, then no, you cannot keep up with a fighter.
I'm not saying you should or should not be able to;. but they do NOT do the same damage.
Higher chance of crits, but, as you described earlier in that same paragraph, proportionally weaker crits.
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
Just a note on the above comment that said, "but you have to look at the class in terms of averages. If you miss 25% of your attacks, and the fighter misses the same, then you are doing the same damage." Well, let's look at that, say, at level 5.
Over 4 turns, the artificer missies once (25%), let's say. So that's 3x 4d6, or an average of 42 points, not including his DEX bonus . Over 4 turns, the fighter (battlemaster) misses twice (25%), so, if he's wielding a d12 weapon that's 6x d12, or an average pf 42 points, not including his DEX bonus, and only if he uses no maneuver dice. If he's a dual wielder, he misses three times, and gets 9x d8, or 45 points, again not including his STR bonus and and only if he uses no maneuver dice. But when you add in three DEX bonuses vs. six STR bonuses, the difference starts to add up, and when you throw in the higher chance of crits given the ability to hit twice as often, then no, you cannot keep up with a fighter.
I'm not saying you should or should not be able to;. but they do NOT do the same damage.
Higher chance of crits, but, as you described earlier in that same paragraph, proportionally weaker crits.
Nonetheless, And lets get the hell off the great axe no class other than the barbarian should ever use that weapon with brutal critical(min/maxing stand point). Great sword or Maul 2d6 both weapons.
And a fighter who is doing that is going to have the great weapon fighting stance re-rolling 1 and 2 damage which is potential for higher damage, as well with all the ASI won't have any problems maxing out it's needed stats, and picking up a feat like great weapon master and you don't even need the active component, the passive portion alone is amazing.
"On your turn, when you score a critical hit with a melee weapon or reduce a creature to 0 hit points with one, you can make one melee weapon attack as a bonus action."
Hello Extra Extra attacks, the fighter argument is dead.
Level 5 Characters, 4 rounds of combat, with 25% missed attacks (No crits, no stat bonuses)
Artificer: with Thunder Cannon 6d6 + Thunder Monger 6d6 (To bad you likely had to take a Stat boost because your MAD no extras for you!) 4 rounds x 1 attack = 4, -25% = 3 x 4d6 = 12d6, 12 x 6 / 2 = 36 dmg average
Battlemaster: with a great sword 12d6 + another 3d6 (action surge, Great Weapon Fighting giving an extra +1 per dice average) 4 rounds x 2 attacks + 2 action surge = 10 attacks - 25% = 8 attacks of 2d6 = 16d6, 16 x 6 / 2 = 48 + 16 = 64 dmg average
Battlemaster: Dual wield rapiers. 9d8 + another 2d8 (action surge, dual wielder + Two - Weapon fighting here is where things shine) 4 rounds x 3 attacks + 3 action surge = 15 attacks - 25% = 11 attacks of 1d8, 11 x 8 / 2 = 44 dmg average
Now then lets look if you add the attribute damage in. We will go standard point array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8)
Artificer Gunsmith; 15 Dex, 14 Con, 13 INT, at level 4 you are likely taking a Stat boost. Lets also assume High elf because they kick ass here +2 Dex, +1 Int your main stats now are 17 Dex, 14 Con, 14 Int Level 4: I personally go resilient +1 Dex, plus that dex saving throw giving you nice saving throw coverage, 18 Dex, 14 Con, 14 Int So we now have +4 x 3 attacks = an extra +12 dmg to our average making it 48 dmg! We are now just beating the dual wield fighter but still behind the GW Fighter before their bonus and buffs of course.
Great Weapon Fighter: 15 Str, 14 Con, 13 Dex, and at level 4 you can take +2 STR lets go Var human because I want all the things! You get great weapon master feat and +1 STR and + 1 Dex, 16 Str, 14 Con, 14 Dex Level 4: You look like this 18 Str, 14 Con, 14 Dex Great now we also get to add +4 x 8 attacks = 32dmg + the 64 average dmg 96 dmg! And we didn't even use GWM
Dual Wield Fighter: 15 Dex, 14 Con, and who cares about the rest Lets go Var human again, +1 Dex +1 to where ever you put that other odd stat number, Dual Wielder feat. 16 Dex, 14 Con Level 4: +2 Dex, 18 Dex, 14 Con Haha silly artificer you thought you could beat me? Lets now add +4 x 11 attacks + the 44 average dmg = 88 dmg
So in the end we still have the artificer doing just over half the amount of dmg a Dual Wield fighter can put out before battle maneuvers, and less than half the damage of a great weapon master fighter, that likely killed something and got to do an extra attack. This also ignores the fact that both these fighters may have had a +1 weapon by level 5 as well! So go ahead and add an additional +11 to dual wield fighters average and + 8 to the great weapon fighter.
So does allowing the artificer the ability to shore up his gap really hurt it, magic item creation are there to shore up this short coming.
I don't know what your point with all of that is supposed to be.
Action surge and fighting styles are CLASS FEATURES.
Artificer has different class features, and excels in different areas. If you WANT to be a fighter, I implore you to be a fighter.
What, precisely is your point, and why should that mean the artificer's gun gets +3/3 custom made magic items at level 4 for next to nothing that also do "bonus" things?
Is your intention to prove that 12d6 +5/6 at level 5 is not very much damage? That the artificer is 10% weaker than a fully combat oriented character (but also has a ton of utility, and a personal gollum that you seem to consistently ignore)? Congrats.
Now, how about addressing my actual criticisms, which you seem to have missed completely?
I feel that the rules for creating magic items aren't clear (At least I can't understand them). There should be a GP cost or something like that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Devious serpent folk devoid of compassion, yuan-ti manipulate other creatures by arousing their doubts, evoking their fears, and elevating and crushing their hopes. From remote temples in jungles, swamps, and deserts, the yuan-ti plot to supplant and dominate all other races and to make themselves gods.
What part do you fail to understand here that even in the last couple posts I made make no mention of a magical item for the artificer? My example was using a level before the "golem" is even possible. Ignoring a fighters Action Surge or battle maneuvers is akin to ignoring the Thunder Monger damage or the Mechanical Servant class ability of the artificer you just don't do it but just to entertain you I'll run the numbers again to prove the point. Because for you it seems perfectly acceptable to ignore half of the fighter just to justify no magic item creation for the gunsmith based on ALL of the class abilities of the Artificer. How is anyone on these boards suppose to take you seriously if you want to consider balance of once class against half of what another is?
"What, precisely is your point, and why should that mean the artificer's gun gets +3/3 custom made magic items at level 4 for next to nothing that also do "bonus" things?"
Do other classes get magic weapons that modify their ability in attacking? YES! But the artificer has nothing, this is the point. This is why you use the class features to make something for yourself. And at no point did I say give it a +3/3 item at level 4. Stop making this up, seriously! It isn't even possible to accomplish this at level 4 so just stop! You very clearly have very little understanding of balance and the rules. So please when I post in detail what you should be reading to consider, to justify the balance of the item I posted go and read it then come back with a constructive post because at this point you very clearly haven't.
"Is your intention to prove that 12d6 +5/6 at level 5 is not very much damage? That the artificer is 10% weaker than a fully combat oriented character (but also has a ton of utility, and a personal gollum that you seem to consistently ignore)? Congrats."
This is an attempt, at making a point but there is nothing saying the fighter is fully combat oriented and can't be a blacksmith as it can pick up tool proficiency. It is simply you mentally blocking that possibility, and the numbers have already proven that the artificer is more than 10% weaker. In the numbers above the artificer is anywhere between 20% - 40% weaker before stats are applied, you apply stats and it is even great at 45%-50% weaker. . . If you are going to toss numbers actually back it up because at this point you just pulling stats from no where in attempt to prove a false point.
Level 5 Characters, 4 rounds of combat, with 25% missed attacks (No crits, no stat bonuses)
Artificer: with Thunder Cannon 6d6 + Thunder Monger 6d6 (To bad you likely had to take a Stat boost because your MAD no extras for you!) 4 rounds x 1 attack = 4, -25% = 3 x 4d6 = 12d6, 12 x 6 / 2 = 36 dmg average
Battlemaster: with a great sword 12d6 + another 3d6 (action surge, Great Weapon Fighting giving an extra +1 per dice average) 4 rounds x 2 attacks + 2 action surge = 10 8 attacks - 25% = 8 6 attacks of 2d6 = 16 12d6, 16 12 x 6 / 2 = 48 36 + 16 = 64 52 dmg We are striking out action surge to prove Diplomacy's point that action surge shouldn't count to potential damage Note I also didn't use battle maneuvers either, because in Diplomacy's world this is a class feature and shouldn't be considered
Battlemaster: Dual wield rapiers. 9d8 + another 2d8 (action surge, dual wielder + Two - Weapon fighting here is where things shine) 4 rounds x 3 attacks + 3 action surge = 15 12 attacks - 25% = 11 9 attacks of 1d8, 11 9 x 8 / 2 = 36 dmg average We are striking out action surge to prove Diplomacy's point that action surge shouldn't count to potential damage Note I also didn't use battle maneuvers either, because in Diplomacy's world this is a class feature and shouldn't be considered
We are kind of on par with a dual wield battlemaster here before all the extra attributes not bad but if we are going to go out of our way to remove a class feature for one it is only fair to do it to the other. Lets see the artificer now.
Artificer: with Thunder Cannon 6d6 + Thunder Monger 6d6 4 rounds x 1 attack = 4, -25% = 3 x 4d6 = 12d6, 12 x 6 / 2 = 36 dmg average 3 attacks, 3 x 2d6 = 36 / 2 = 18 dmg But if we are going with ignore extra damage from class features. Yup ignoring class features to try and prove a point doesn't seem to work when you look at the numbers...
BUT THE GOLEM! You're ignoring the "golem". But lets not forget we need to use the CLASS FEATURE Mechanical Servant to show Artificer is balanced against a fighter that isn't using it's class features.
But sure lets roll with this. First up, lets be sure we actuallyread the UA correctly and use the correct stats here as to not be using something unintended like a Griffon. So a CR2 Large Beast. There are no CR 2 flying. Lets use the king of stats for CR2 Beasts. By no means am I saying this is how people should be playing or picking but I'm looking at a min max situation. https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/allosaurus
Lets make this interesting and go right to level 12 at this point
Same rules as before 4 rounds of combat and a 25% miss rate. We will use the same races and stats with the exception that we will assume everyone now has a 20 in either DEX or STR for max hitting and damage. Our fighters also have 2 feats or more stats to CON likely, and as before we will continue to ignore battlemasters maneuvers like I had before and didn't add in that additional damage.
Artificer, 1 attack a turn, 4 attacks - 25% (3 attacks x (2d6 + 5d6) / 2 ) +15 = ((3 x 7d6) / 2) + 15 = 21 x 6 / 2 + 15 = 78 dmg! We are still behind the level 5 Battlemaster Great weapon fighter.
But lets add in the Mechanical Servant's damage. 4 rounds, but because I'm so confident that even with this added damage the artificer is going to come in so far behind I'll say this thing hits it's bonus action attack. 4 attacks - 25% + 1 Bonus action attack. This will look like this 1 attack of 1d8 + 4 and 3 attacks of 2d10 + 4 1d8 / 2 + 4 = 8 dmg (3 x 2d10 / 2) + 12 = (6d10 / 2) + 12 = 42 dmg 42 + 8 = 50 dmg
So your Mechanical Servant does 50 dmg over those 4 rounds + the gun doing 78 dmg = 128 dmg
Battlemaster fighter Great Weapon 2d6. Remember +1 to the average of dice that hit the target because of the fighting stance. (3 attacks x 4 rounds + 3 additional attacks from action surge) - 25% = 11 hits (+11 dmg from the fighting stance) (11 x 2d6 / 2) + 55 = 66 + 55 + 11= 143 dmg
That is before battle maneuvers, if you were to also use your 5d10 to inflict more dmg or not miss an attack you would have at a minimum +25 DMG if you went just dmg. Potentially 168 dmg
Battlemaster Dual Wield Rapiers 1d8. 4 attacks a turn (4 attacks x 4 rounds + 4 additional attacks from action surge) - 25% = 15 attacks (15 x 1d8 / 2) + 75 = 135dmg
That is before battle maneuvers, if you were to also use your 5d10 to inflict more dmg or not miss an attack you would have at a minimum +25 DMG. In this case though you certainly would want to be using precision attacks. Because if you hit the 5 missed attacks you get 5d8 / 2 + 25= 45 additional dmg
So at this point yes the artificer has some potential for catching up. . . But! The cost of 39% of it's dmg is very steep and flimsy. At level 12 the Mechanical Servant doesn't take much kill with so little hp and AC. It then costs you an incredible amount of money to replace it, if it beyond the typical means.
Going to make a separate post to address the last part, and help @DungeonLord58 with how magic items are made, and maybe it might make a little more sense to just how much/difficult it is to make the item I suggested.
My last post on page 3 of this thread I outline magic item creation .
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)
So to answer your question DungeonLord58 The gold costs associated with creating a magical item is outlined on page 128-129 of the Dungeon Masters Guide with the cost associated with creating said item.
Magic Item Rarity costs can also be found on page 135 for the Dungeon Masters Guide
Now then let me painful break this down this item I had posted before.
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
While these items have a gold piece value attached you need to look at the BIGGER picture. And for the +1 version of this mod it is the GEM. That Gem isn't just found anywhere and does require some searching. So lets look to the DMG (Dungeon Masters Guide). So starting on page 133 you can read about Treasure tables, now read that. Then lets look at page 138. A Gem of the caliber I'm suggesting to use for this mod is found in a Treasure Hoard of a Challenge Rating 11 - 16. Stop and think about that Challenge rating for a +1 item.
This is going up against an ADULT DRAGON at level 4. Hello TPK!!!
So, lets look at other options. This could be a prize in a contest, maybe a rich noble has one in his/her person and you can steal it. There are other options as well maybe you can purchase this gem, but it is very very unlikely to sold. Remember this Gem is Royalty level.
So did I just randomly pull something out of my back end without considerable thought? NO!
The price listed isn't even the full price. Lets take the gem for example, Sure you might find a ruby of value but then you need to commission a gem cutter if you don't have the tools. Also don't think you can just have all the tools, you get to pick 2 tools of which you don't actually start with, the only tools you start with are the thieves tools. When you go gunsmith you also gain proficiency with smith tools which guess what you don't actually have!
These tools aren't cheap. pg 154 of the players hand book. But for arguements sake lets say you took tinkerers tools and gem cutting tools. Congrats those are the 2 most expensive ones, hurray! 50gp and 25gp. And the Tinkerers are also the heaviest winning some serious awards here.
Proficiencies Armor: Light and medium armor Weapons: Simple weapons Tools: Thieves’ tools, two other tools of your choice
Equipment You start with the following equipment, in addition to the equipment granted by your background: • (a) a handaxe and a light hammer or (b) any two simple weapons • a light crossbow and 20 bolts • (a) scale mail or (b) studded leather armor • thieves’ tools and a dungeoneer’s pack
Gunsmith A master of engineering, you forge a firearm powered by a combination of science and magic.
Master Smith When you choose this specialization at 1st level, you gain proficiency with smith’s tools, and you learn the mending cantrip.
Figured I'd give those tidbits of info. That is a direct copy for the Artificers UA.
Anyhow but lets say you didn't take a tool or maybe you've yet to acquire them because maybe you aren't starting some where you can get them. Now you need to find NPCs to help you make these items. All of this takes time and guess what more money! So you may need 1 pound of silver valued at 5gp, but the npc wants 10 gold for his time to make the pieces you need. And that gem cutter well you might have brought him a gem worth 400gp but he wants 10% to cut it. so now you're up another 40gp and time to cut the gem.
Lets go another step and this gem has caught some intrigue from a local thieves guild and becomes the target of a heist. Maybe the gem cutter isn't so honest and steals this, or if this was a stolen gem recognizes it and turns you into the authorities.
This magic item has had considerable thought in how this needs to be approached. The examples I've given are incredibly basic but if a good DM is out there they can see the potential is this.
I also want to point out that the value of a gem isn't based on it's size (Carats). So for example; The key to a diamond's value is its rarity, and no two diamonds are alike. Rarity is determined by a diamond's unique characteristics as measured by the Four Cs: Cut, Color, Clarity and Carat Weight. (Thank you google) These four Cs as it is used for diamonds are also used to determine the value of other gem stones like Rubies and Diamonds.
So when I put the pricing together for the gems I used the tables from the DMG because anything less than the lowest level ruby I suggested wouldn't have the size and clarity needed for the mod.
This mod isn't just something someone walks into a store and buys.
This myth that Diplomacy is carrying around of having a +3/3 at level 4 isn't realistically attainable.
This is an attempt, at making a point but there is nothing saying the fighter is fully combat oriented and can't be a black smith.
All it takes to be a blacksmith is a decent Strength score and proficiency with smith's tools (easily available from background).
Yes and in Battlemaster you can do this. edit; Hell you don't even need smith's tools from the background at level 3 you get to pick what set you want.
I only revised and added to existing UA material, so the text pulls straight from US for that reason.
So anyone have any thoughts?
There are a few things there I don't like and a few things that aren't bad.
Arcane Essence: why can't a wizard sorcerer see these fonts?
Modular items: Interesting but again the creation system within the dmg for magic items are very well outlined and I don't see the need to add something tied to the arcane essence system.
Defuse Magic: Is interesting but but just give the artificer spell list dispel magic.
The level 19 thing is kinda meh especially for a level 19 ability
So I'm not to aquainted with the alchemist side of the artificer, but the whole using of the Thunder Cannon with 1h isn't close. Weapons that drop 1 hand to use always do less damage. you don't have that so why would anyone ever use it two handed?
Why did you add the stipulation of only have 1 Thunder Cannon at a time?
Ok so the 2h version of Thunder Monger is scary and not usually the way things work. Again d6 for two hands, maybe d4 for a single handed.
I just realized you removed the Mechanical Servant from all sub classes and added a subclass for it alone. If you look at my numbers for how much damage the gunsmith is doing without the mechanical servant you are seriously gimping him, and he would require something to shore that up or there would be almost no value in having a guy that is just good with tools.
The constructor Interesting it does touch on the idea that people have tossed around that it should be its own subclass but unfortunately I think it misses a few marks primarly in the choice the of addition of CR 4 Large or Medium Beast or Aberration. Level 9 aint a bad spot for the skill and cr 4 doesn't bother me. But why Aberration? and there aren't any CR4 Beasts
I'm not sold on the traps, as they currently are listed. It seem kind of odd with how they are dependent on the spell lists. If you look to the alchemist satchel and the arcane archer fighter archetype, and using these to come up with some trap ideas then I think you will have something much more interesting. Tying the spells into the traps goes into a grey area of who is maintaining concentration. So be careful how you approach this.
You also miss one of the largest opportunities where you could have addressed the many existing issues with the mechanical servant and that it doesn't scale. Leaving this mechanical servant to also level 9 makes the curve of playing this sub class a little painful. As you get something at level 1 that is subclass specific then nothing till level 9. No sub class does this I think you need to reconsider what you are wanting to achieve here.
The spell list changes... Well I disagree with the addition of many of the spells, and disagree with some of the spells removed. Damage spells should go, they aren't thematic with what the class originally had.
If you look closely to the list of spells that currently populate the list more are from the schools of Transmutation, and Abjuration. There are a few Divination ones and 1 or 2 if I remember correctly illusion spells and I think one is necromancy. So going from that any spells that are going to be added should likely come from these areas. And careful to not add spells that are offensive in nature as the spells that exist are supportive in nature. For example water walk/breathing, haste, aid, jump ect.
But yeah it's late, I think you need consider these as currently you have gutted two sub classes with the removal of the mechanical servant and haven't really replaced it with anything to prop them back up.
People think dmg doesnt have crafting but it really does. The only real problem i have with crafting is... The time... A simple potion of healing is taking 4 days. So what i did i simply changed days to hours effectively making this 8 times faster.
So my players can literally create stuff during long or short rest and once they finish the time. I require them a skill check with the necessary tools.
The goal of the money needed was just to stop the 3e problem of mages having infinite spells at 5th level thanks to scrolls and potions.
5e solved that by requiring more time to craft.
Artificer could have a feature that simply diminishes that time period even further. That solves all the problems. One could also solve the problem by simply saying he gains recipe and not the gear. But that breaks economy as he will create items for everyone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
I only revised and added to existing UA material, so the text pulls straight from US for that reason.
So anyone have any thoughts?
There are a few things there I don't like and a few things that aren't bad.
Arcane Essence: why can't a wizard sorcerer see these fonts?
Modular items: Interesting but again the creation system within the dmg for magic items are very well outlined and I don't see the need to add something tied to the arcane essence system.
Defuse Magic: Is interesting but but just give the artificer spell list dispel magic.
The level 19 thing is kinda meh especially for a level 19 ability
So I'm not to aquainted with the alchemist side of the artificer, but the whole using of the Thunder Cannon with 1h isn't close. Weapons that drop 1 hand to use always do less damage. you don't have that so why would anyone ever use it two handed?
Why did you add the stipulation of only have 1 Thunder Cannon at a time?
Ok so the 2h version of Thunder Monger is scary and not usually the way things work. Again d6 for two hands, maybe d4 for a single handed.
I just realized you removed the Mechanical Servant from all sub classes and added a subclass for it alone. If you look at my numbers for how much damage the gunsmith is doing without the mechanical servant you are seriously gimping him, and he would require something to shore that up or there would be almost no value in having a guy that is just good with tools.
The constructor Interesting it does touch on the idea that people have tossed around that it should be its own subclass but unfortunately I think it misses a few marks primarly in the choice the of addition of CR 4 Large or Medium Beast or Aberration. Level 9 aint a bad spot for the skill and cr 4 doesn't bother me. But why Aberration? and there aren't any CR4 Beasts
I'm not sold on the traps, as they currently are listed. It seem kind of odd with how they are dependent on the spell lists. If you look to the alchemist satchel and the arcane archer fighter archetype, and using these to come up with some trap ideas then I think you will have something much more interesting. Tying the spells into the traps goes into a grey area of who is maintaining concentration. So be careful how you approach this.
You also miss one of the largest opportunities where you could have addressed the many existing issues with the mechanical servant and that it doesn't scale. Leaving this mechanical servant to also level 9 makes the curve of playing this sub class a little painful. As you get something at level 1 that is subclass specific then nothing till level 9. No sub class does this I think you need to reconsider what you are wanting to achieve here.
The spell list changes... Well I disagree with the addition of many of the spells, and disagree with some of the spells removed. Damage spells should go, they aren't thematic with what the class originally had.
If you look closely to the list of spells that currently populate the list more are from the schools of Transmutation, and Abjuration. There are a few Divination ones and 1 or 2 if I remember correctly illusion spells and I think one is necromancy. So going from that any spells that are going to be added should likely come from these areas. And careful to not add spells that are offensive in nature as the spells that exist are supportive in nature. For example water walk/breathing, haste, aid, jump ect.
But yeah it's late, I think you need consider these as currently you have gutted two sub classes with the removal of the mechanical servant and haven't really replaced it with anything to prop them back up.
Cheers,
Okay, so I'm going to go over my line of thinking here a bit with each thing and work my way down the list.
Because of the nature of wizards and artificers using intelligence as their basis of interest in the arcane, they're pretty closely aligned. However, wizards also can't infuse magic, and it could be argued that they theoretically should be able to- except it would defeat the purpose of a class like the artificer and narrow its definition severely. That said, you could potentially argue that wizards could see the fonts, and possibly even draw from them; they just wouldn't have any use for them without an infuse magic ability. So infuse magic makes the real difference in that circumstance.
Your second bit about the clarity of the creation of magic items. So one of my chief complaints with the Artificer class as it stands in the UA is that it, well...doesn't do a lot of creating items. So I wanted to design a way that was special to the artificer to do that; otherwise, there's no real point in calling him an artificer if he just creates items the same way everyone else does. I didn't feel that infuse magic was enough to justify the title, anyway. I toyed with a bunch of ideas to implement a way to make item creation special to the artificer- the first one involved tying their ability to create such items to the depletion of spell slots, which would limit what level of spells could be used, but it also created a slog for players who had to wait for the artificer to regain spell slots before doing anything.
Defuse Magic. You could just say dispel magic, but I didn't necessarily want to add a spell slot cost, and that doesn't draw any arcane threads from the item. Dispel magic, to me, literally, well..dispels it. Defuse Magic was more like drawing the magic in my mind. But if you want to replace defuse magic with dispel magic based on these concepts, then that's totally doable.
And the Thunder Cannon. This thing seems to have caused more headaches for people when it comes to modifying it for some reason. So the 1h Thunder Cannon I created does do less than the 2h, but only with the Thunder Monger feature; the base damage is the same. However, you could move that up to 2d8 if desired. But the reason I was hesitant to lower the damage of the 1h is simple: it didn't make sense to me that a gun would do so little damage. I guess 2d4 (or 1d8) would potentially work, but as the subclass itself lacks anything but the cannon, weakening it seemed dangerous to me. And I added the bit about only one Thunder Cannon at a time specifically for people who would try to make two 1h cannons and dual wield them.
That all said, I tried to keep the 2h's dmg in check by limiting the amount of times it gains its Thunder Monger power. So with the 1 handed at level 19's top damage is 54, not including the base damage. The 2h at level 17 top damage (when it caps) is 60. So you get a little more power a little quicker, but it doesn't break it much more than some would say the thunder cannon already is.
The Constructor. So the mechanical servant makes total sense to me- but yeah, I agree that it should be its own subclass. But the artificer's gunsmith subclass is pretty powerful on its own; I'd be more concerned with taking it away from the alchemist, but as I haven't found a good replacement that would fit with that subclass, I mostly left the alchemist alone.
That said, the Constructor was one of my great concerns. The numbers were suggested by another party, as well as adding aberrations to offer more options based on the CR, which I liked. But those numbers are not set in stone to me, and I could see them being inaccurate. The idea was to give it some scaling, though, because a CR2 servant would be useless to me later on. This is something I would like to improve on for sure, and make this a much more stable subclass.
Traps. This was another thing that I felt was sorely missing from the artificer. I've always thought of him as more a support role than a stand-alone class, and traps fit that bill. Especially when we're throwing the idea of someone who is supposed to be creating magical items into the mix. This subclass to me could be a little more chaotic in nature, and the spell list I modified is supposed to reflect that. I picture someone stepping on a trap and suddenly being overcome by Tasha's Hideous Laughter, thereby causing the enemy to become overwhelmed for a period and alert any part members nearby. I wanted people to get creative with their use of spells and traps.
I tried to keep away mostly from damage spells, but I thought I'd at least add one, which I thought could be especially useful for the traps. However, I don't think it's a thematic problem to have a couple damage spells on the list, provided most of them revolve around the support role. Because who am I to stop how someone wants to play the artificer? If they want to be able to do damage spells, I guess they should be able to. That was the argument in my head anyway, for including the whole wizard list, but I opted against it for fear that it would be too powerful. Still, I don't feel that my point is wrong there ultimately.
Anyway, thanks for the feedback; hopefully I can fine-tune some of the issues, and hopefully my explanations for some of my concepts make enough sense logically.
1) actually its 11d6. 9d6 is thunder damage, 2d6 is piercing, and then there is potentially another 2-3 attacks by the artificial construct that I didn't count for simplicity (for my griffon it was 2d6 Slashing and 1d8 piercing). But you are right, it's not the actual formula. just a rough rule of thumb...
2) yes, I know, but you have to look at the class in terms of averages. If you miss 25% of your attacks, and the fighter misses the same, then you are doing the same damage. Not misleading at all, even though it feelsbadman to roll once and then do nothing for a whole round, or even two. It's not unreasonable to look at the classes comparatively, and it's even not unreasonable to expect the fighter to outdamage the ranger because you have the advantage of distance (and potentially a flying mount). Compare it to an actual ranger or a fighter with a bow and the artificer is quite good.
The artificer + to hit isn't "******." +4 at level 1/ +8 by level 12 /+11 to hit at lvl 20. Bounded accuracy. Tweaking the + to hit is something that should be at the DM's discretion. The artificer also gets 4 sets of tools, a bonus construct PC and magic, so I think it's rather nonsense when people say "oh, he has nothing to offer."
___
1) well at low levels 3 attunement slots are nothing, since you don't have anything else to attune anyway and the artificer actually gets extra slots. +3 magic weapons at level 5 for 1200GP is more than just fortunate, it's game breaking.
1b) I think that you missed the part of my whole thing was that my main concern with this change is that it turns magic items into an at-will comodity. if you HAVE a rod of the war mage, by all means try to invent a "scope of the war mage" using that as a component, and a couple of rolls. Whether or not you come across a 'rod of the war mage' though, or whether he makes you roll to "reconstruct" it into something else that's up to your DM.
2) Well but here's the thing, you are combining these into 1 item. This isn't a thematic re-skin, Wand of the War Mage gives a bonus to spell attack rolls, and while it is a clear example of an item that might be useless to an artificer, there are items that aren't useless. A variety of armors, helms, necklaces, poisons, potions.
3) Again, using a magic item, and creating, then combining 2-5 items into 1 super-item that does 10 things are 2 completely different ideas. It's the small difference of putting down your gun, and pulling out the magic thorn whip vs simply having everything built in, but yeah, absolutely, if you cross-polinate that +2 whip and that cloak of displacement with a gun that does 11d6 per round, then yeah, I start getting worried.
"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)
"Select a Large beast with a challenge rating of 2 or less.The servant uses that beast’s gamestatistics, but it can look however you like, as long as its form is appropriate for its statistics."
The griffon is a monstrosity and can't be used.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/griffon
The attacks from said construct are ok early but 3 - 4 levels later drop of significantly has the thing has a good potential to be one shotted. You have even said the thing has significant issues with scaling. I personally am on the fence with that because the construct over some kind of utility but agree that it has problems. Of which you can try correcting with magic item or crafting. But that flair that you keep tossing back as where it shines you have seemingly found ways to make it about as terrible and useless as possible.
You also have said this "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)"
http://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/unearthed-arcana/508-artificer-modifications?comment=41
So are you taking that statement back?
I want to point out that a majority of your posts contradict each other immensely. You've cherry picked specific things you like flip flop between a homebrew and then qoute RAW left and right for things to support a point of view. While the whole time mine has been from RAW. Your posts that you use as points have a very good tendecy to blow things out of proportion to also push support to your point of view.
Point in case you last post states "3) Again, using a magic item, and creating, then combining 2-5 items into 1 super-item that does 10 things are 2 completely different ideas."
At no point in time has any of my post suggested anything of the sort. Where are you getting these ideas from? Lets at least attempt to be constructive here..
You also constantly compare the gun to a great axe, why? The weapon is a 1d12, not 2d6.
But moving on.
Addressing your number 2.
You give the distict impression that the one thing the Artificer can do for damage shouldn't be as good or better than that of the Fighter. Why? The fighter is a jack of all master of nothing. Classes don't have to all do the same thing and I know this will get tossed back at me, but in this case when the gunsmiths source of damage contribution is it's gun at range then it should excel in this category. You have also said the class comes with no proficiency in long swords, rapiers, short swords or the sort, so after that damage should be the construct to which you have outlined as well doesn't scale.
Average attacks and misses, of 25% do not equal out to being roughly the same. Not even close, the fighter is going to be rerolling damage die of 1 and 2s also consistently ensuring a higher quality of damage.
But this a side I think it might come down to a difference in how we are perceiving this class.
I'm going to take your examples that you like to keep using. Fighter, Ranger, and the Artificer, and explain how I see them
Fighter: Hands down the simpliest and most forgiving class to play, as I said Jack of all trades master if only you completely gear it that way at which point he can be the most broken thing running around with all the extra ASI. 1d10 health, extra attacks are plenty, fighting stance(s) are available. Plenty of options to specialize the class moving away from that jack of all point of view.
Ranger: A mid to back line dps/support class. It has potential to engage in melee when it desires and has at it's disposal a fantastic spell list for both damage, crowd control, buffs, debuffs, and support. With half a spell list/slots. A moderate difficulty to play as one has far more options available to it. The class skills further improve utility into a varierty of potential options. Fantastic health options with a 1d10 extra attack here as well, fight stance options.
Artificer: 1 of 2 options, 1d8 for health (it's respectable), but given how the gunsmith tends to be more than a little MAD (Multi-Attribute Dependent, I'd go as far as saying it is on par with Monk). The class features are fairly shallow, but plays entirely to the idea that this class MAKES magic items and doesn't require a magic item to make one. The range of the gun is less than that of the longbow, 150/500 vs 150/600. The class has good out of combat potential with tools. sadly two are picked for you (Thieves/smiths tools[gunsmith] ). The class is all about having magic items, using magic items, and having them attuned.
The mechanical servant well . . . It's a thing, you can get creative with it but if you want a flying one it is going to weak so not likely riding it in combat. It can be a CR0 - CR2 LARGE BEAST only. Better hope the thing doesn't die to often where you can't retrieve the body because 1,000 gp rebuild cost adds up fast. The gun is also significantly more expensive than any other weapon to replace especially if take into consideration the magazine. You aren't just walking into a shop to buy one either over the counter.
Spells! It is a 1/3rd magic list, utility options are there, and yeah you can give coins away lets hope though your INT stat is good because other wise you won't be passing many around and some of the spells are going to be less effective. But if you sacraficed your DEX to have a better INT lets hope that doesn't effect how often you need to hit... Lets not forget that 80% of the spells are Actions, and/or require concentration (pretty sure 80% is on the low side). So Remember that whole MAD it is a good thing the class comes with a CON Saving throws because you sure are as hell going to need that if you get hit.
The above gets worse because if you want to make use of Two sub class abilities Blast Wave and Piercing Round, you need to be close. Admittedly the Blast wave is more of get out of face ability to get away but realistically you likely never want to be in that position to use it, and then Piercing Round, for a class that has these abilities based off of such a long range weapon it sure is putting you close into the fight. And in those situations where you can't avoid that don't worry I'm sure your team mates will understand why you shot them in the back.
Seeing as I'm touching on it lets just mention just how weak Explosive Round is for a level 17 ability. So at level 17 you can't even muster an aoe spell that compares to the lowest spell level casting of Fireball, granted it doesn't require a spell slot to use but still 4d8 fire dmg?
Lastly The above is also very dependent on having a good spell save DC so that INT stat better be top notch. Otherwise you're more than likely better of just shooting and hoping you don't miss.
1) well at low levels 3 attunement slots are nothing, since you don't have anything else to attune anyway and the artificer actually gets extra slots. +3 magic weapons at level 5 for 1200GP is more than just fortunate, it's game breaking.
This isn't likely to happen given the amount of time and cost of making an actual magical item. You need to be level 3 before you can even attempt it and then you do need to acquire the resources. It isn't just gold stop thinking of it that way. The player still needs to source the materials and then have a place to make the item. This isn't something that just poofs into existence. And honestly is a whole party going to simply be ok with this one player wanting to stop for 2 weeks to do this? How does stopping effect the story? A GOOD DM can balance this without the requirement of finding a magic item first to make a magic item. When the class can clearly make it's own items that it's just given to the player, if this was intended the whole Magic item list might as well be put into the options that this class can get because the charm of the class is allowing a creative player come up with potential magic items. Its the role of a GOOD DM to make sure they fit within the scope of balance and rules (RAW).
1b) I think that you missed the part of my whole thing was that my main concern with this change is that it turns magic items into an at-will comodity. if you HAVE a rod of the war mage, by all means try to invent a "scope of the war mage" using that as a component, and a couple of rolls. Whether or not you come across a 'rod of the war mage' though, or whether he makes you roll to "reconstruct" it into something else that's up to your DM.
Addressed above.
2) Well but here's the thing, you are combining these into 1 item. This isn't a thematic re-skin, Wand of the War Mage gives a bonus to spell attack rolls, and while it is a clear example of an item that
mightWOULD be useless to an artificer, there are items that aren't useless. A variety of armors, helms, necklaces, poisons, potions. (I fixed the statement to better reflect what you were thinking but didn't want to admit to)I'm attaching them to a weapon this is no difference than the mages hands being used to cast a fireball here, they can hold multiple items to change the effectiveness of their spells. The gunsmith has to approach this a little differently as it's hands are already holding the gun.
Yeah sure those items exist, but if a player wants to use those tools and class outlined abilities to make something as RAW says they can why can't they? The wand of the war mage was given as an example of cost and value of what is being provided to base another item of magical creation off of.
You also seem hung up on the idea that the only magic items the artificer should get are those given by the DM or those given from the class list. RAW States how magical items are made Page 128 of the DMG.
Wand of the War Mage (+1/+2/+3) (Uncommon/Rare/Very Rare)
While holding this wand, you gain a bonus to spell attack rolls determined by the wands rarity. In addition you ignore half cover when making a spell attack.
How isn't the laser sight a re-skin of this?
Laser Sight Mod. (+1/+2/+3) Shots made from the Gun with this modification Ignore Half Cover.
The item is being held attached to the weapon, it requires attunement, it matches the costs associated with an item of the same values.
I could see the argument of only allows two magical items created in this manner to being used 1 for each hand that is supporting the weapon.
I addressed your final piece in the opening.
Just a note on the above comment that said, "but you have to look at the class in terms of averages. If you miss 25% of your attacks, and the fighter misses the same, then you are doing the same damage." Well, let's look at that, say, at level 5.
Over 4 turns, the artificer missies once (25%), let's say. So that's 3x 4d6, or an average of 42 points, not including his DEX bonus . Over 4 turns, the fighter (battlemaster) misses twice (25%), so, if he's wielding a d12 weapon that's 6x d12, or an average pf 42 points, not including his DEX bonus, and only if he uses no maneuver dice. If he's a dual wielder, he misses three times, and gets 9x d8, or 45 points, again not including his STR bonus and and only if he uses no maneuver dice. But when you add in three DEX bonuses vs. six STR bonuses, the difference starts to add up, and when you throw in the higher chance of crits given the ability to hit twice as often, then no, you cannot keep up with a fighter.
I'm not saying you should or should not be able to;. but they do NOT do the same damage.
"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)
Great sword or Maul 2d6 both weapons.
And a fighter who is doing that is going to have the great weapon fighting stance re-rolling 1 and 2 damage which is potential for higher damage, as well with all the ASI won't have any problems maxing out it's needed stats, and picking up a feat like great weapon master and you don't even need the active component, the passive portion alone is amazing.
"On your turn, when you score a critical hit with a melee weapon or reduce a creature to 0 hit points with one, you can make one melee weapon attack as a bonus action."
Hello Extra Extra attacks, the fighter argument is dead.
Level 5 Characters, 4 rounds of combat, with 25% missed attacks (No crits, no stat bonuses)
Artificer: with Thunder Cannon 6d6 + Thunder Monger 6d6 (To bad you likely had to take a Stat boost because your MAD no extras for you!)
4 rounds x 1 attack = 4, -25% = 3 x 4d6 = 12d6, 12 x 6 / 2 = 36 dmg average
Battlemaster: with a great sword 12d6 + another 3d6 (action surge, Great Weapon Fighting giving an extra +1 per dice average)
4 rounds x 2 attacks + 2 action surge = 10 attacks - 25% = 8 attacks of 2d6 = 16d6, 16 x 6 / 2 = 48 + 16 = 64 dmg average
Battlemaster: Dual wield rapiers. 9d8 + another 2d8 (action surge, dual wielder + Two - Weapon fighting here is where things shine)
4 rounds x 3 attacks + 3 action surge = 15 attacks - 25% = 11 attacks of 1d8, 11 x 8 / 2 = 44 dmg average
Now then lets look if you add the attribute damage in. We will go standard point array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8)
Artificer Gunsmith; 15 Dex, 14 Con, 13 INT, at level 4 you are likely taking a Stat boost.
Lets also assume High elf because they kick ass here +2 Dex, +1 Int your main stats now are 17 Dex, 14 Con, 14 Int
Level 4: I personally go resilient +1 Dex, plus that dex saving throw giving you nice saving throw coverage, 18 Dex, 14 Con, 14 Int
So we now have +4 x 3 attacks = an extra +12 dmg to our average making it 48 dmg!
We are now just beating the dual wield fighter but still behind the GW Fighter before their bonus and buffs of course.
Great Weapon Fighter: 15 Str, 14 Con, 13 Dex, and at level 4 you can take +2 STR
lets go Var human because I want all the things! You get great weapon master feat and +1 STR and + 1 Dex, 16 Str, 14 Con, 14 Dex
Level 4: You look like this 18 Str, 14 Con, 14 Dex
Great now we also get to add +4 x 8 attacks = 32dmg + the 64 average dmg 96 dmg! And we didn't even use GWM
Dual Wield Fighter: 15 Dex, 14 Con, and who cares about the rest
Lets go Var human again, +1 Dex +1 to where ever you put that other odd stat number, Dual Wielder feat. 16 Dex, 14 Con
Level 4: +2 Dex, 18 Dex, 14 Con
Haha silly artificer you thought you could beat me? Lets now add +4 x 11 attacks + the 44 average dmg = 88 dmg
So in the end we still have the artificer doing just over half the amount of dmg a Dual Wield fighter can put out before battle maneuvers, and less than half the damage of a great weapon master fighter, that likely killed something and got to do an extra attack. This also ignores the fact that both these fighters may have had a +1 weapon by level 5 as well! So go ahead and add an additional +11 to dual wield fighters average and + 8 to the great weapon fighter.
So does allowing the artificer the ability to shore up his gap really hurt it, magic item creation are there to shore up this short coming.
Here's my mod (so far):
Artifice Mod
I only revised and added to existing UA material, so the text pulls straight from US for that reason.
-Dresden White
I don't know what your point with all of that is supposed to be.
Action surge and fighting styles are CLASS FEATURES.
Artificer has different class features, and excels in different areas. If you WANT to be a fighter, I implore you to be a fighter.
What, precisely is your point, and why should that mean the artificer's gun gets +3/3 custom made magic items at level 4 for next to nothing that also do "bonus" things?
Is your intention to prove that 12d6 +5/6 at level 5 is not very much damage? That the artificer is 10% weaker than a fully combat oriented character (but also has a ton of utility, and a personal gollum that you seem to consistently ignore)? Congrats.
Now, how about addressing my actual criticisms, which you seem to have missed completely?
I feel that the rules for creating magic items aren't clear (At least I can't understand them). There should be a GP cost or something like that.
Devious serpent folk devoid of compassion, yuan-ti manipulate other creatures by arousing their doubts, evoking their fears, and elevating and crushing their hopes. From remote temples in jungles, swamps, and deserts, the yuan-ti plot to supplant and dominate all other races and to make themselves gods.
Dear Diplomacy,
What part do you fail to understand here that even in the last couple posts I made make no mention of a magical item for the artificer?
My example was using a level before the "golem" is even possible.
Ignoring a fighters Action Surge or battle maneuvers is akin to ignoring the Thunder Monger damage or the Mechanical Servant class ability of the artificer you just don't do it but just to entertain you I'll run the numbers again to prove the point. Because for you it seems perfectly acceptable to ignore half of the fighter just to justify no magic item creation for the gunsmith based on ALL of the class abilities of the Artificer. How is anyone on these boards suppose to take you seriously if you want to consider balance of once class against half of what another is?
"What, precisely is your point, and why should that mean the artificer's gun gets +3/3 custom made magic items at level 4 for next to nothing that also do "bonus" things?"
Do other classes get magic weapons that modify their ability in attacking? YES! But the artificer has nothing, this is the point. This is why you use the class features to make something for yourself. And at no point did I say give it a +3/3 item at level 4. Stop making this up, seriously! It isn't even possible to accomplish this at level 4 so just stop! You very clearly have very little understanding of balance and the rules. So please when I post in detail what you should be reading to consider, to justify the balance of the item I posted go and read it then come back with a constructive post because at this point you very clearly haven't.
"Is your intention to prove that 12d6 +5/6 at level 5 is not very much damage? That the artificer is 10% weaker than a fully combat oriented character (but also has a ton of utility, and a personal gollum that you seem to consistently ignore)? Congrats."
This is an attempt, at making a point but there is nothing saying the fighter is fully combat oriented and can't be a blacksmith as it can pick up tool proficiency. It is simply you mentally blocking that possibility, and the numbers have already proven that the artificer is more than 10% weaker. In the numbers above the artificer is anywhere between 20% - 40% weaker before stats are applied, you apply stats and it is even great at 45%-50% weaker. . . If you are going to toss numbers actually back it up because at this point you just pulling stats from no where in attempt to prove a false point.
Level 5 Characters, 4 rounds of combat, with 25% missed attacks (No crits, no stat bonuses)
Artificer: with Thunder Cannon 6d6 + Thunder Monger 6d6 (To bad you likely had to take a Stat boost because your MAD no extras for you!)
4 rounds x 1 attack = 4, -25% = 3 x 4d6 = 12d6, 12 x 6 / 2 = 36 dmg average
Battlemaster: with a great sword 12d6 + another 3d6 (action surge, Great Weapon Fighting giving an extra +1 per dice average)
4 rounds x 2 attacks +
2 action surge=108 attacks - 25% =86 attacks of 2d6 =1612d6,1612 x 6 / 2 =4836 + 16 =6452 dmgWe are striking out action surge to prove Diplomacy's point that action surge shouldn't count to potential damage
Note I also didn't use battle maneuvers either, because in Diplomacy's world this is a class feature and shouldn't be considered
Battlemaster: Dual wield rapiers. 9d8 + another 2d8 (action surge, dual wielder + Two - Weapon fighting here is where things shine)
4 rounds x 3 attacks +
3 action surge=1512 attacks - 25% =119 attacks of 1d8,119 x 8 / 2 = 36 dmg averageWe are striking out action surge to prove Diplomacy's point that action surge shouldn't count to potential damage
Note I also didn't use battle maneuvers either, because in Diplomacy's world this is a class feature and shouldn't be considered
We are kind of on par with a dual wield battlemaster here before all the extra attributes not bad but if we are going to go out of our way to remove a class feature for one it is only fair to do it to the other. Lets see the artificer now.
Artificer: with Thunder Cannon 6d6
+ Thunder Monger 6d64 rounds x 1 attack = 4, -25% =
3 x 4d6 = 12d6, 12 x 6 / 2 = 36 dmg average3 attacks, 3 x 2d6 = 36 / 2 = 18 dmgBut if we are going with ignore extra damage from class features.
Yup ignoring class features to try and prove a point doesn't seem to work when you look at the numbers...
BUT THE GOLEM! You're ignoring the "golem".
But lets not forget we need to use the CLASS FEATURE Mechanical Servant to show Artificer is balanced against a fighter that isn't using it's class features.
But sure lets roll with this. First up, lets be sure we actually read the UA correctly and use the correct stats here as to not be using something unintended like a Griffon.
So a CR2 Large Beast. There are no CR 2 flying.
Lets use the king of stats for CR2 Beasts. By no means am I saying this is how people should be playing or picking but I'm looking at a min max situation.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/allosaurus
Lets make this interesting and go right to level 12 at this point
Same rules as before 4 rounds of combat and a 25% miss rate.
We will use the same races and stats with the exception that we will assume everyone now has a 20 in either DEX or STR for max hitting and damage.
Our fighters also have 2 feats or more stats to CON likely, and as before we will continue to ignore battlemasters maneuvers like I had before and didn't add in that additional damage.
Artificer, 1 attack a turn, 4 attacks - 25%
(3 attacks x (2d6 + 5d6) / 2 ) +15 = ((3 x 7d6) / 2) + 15 = 21 x 6 / 2 + 15 = 78 dmg!
We are still behind the level 5 Battlemaster Great weapon fighter.
But lets add in the Mechanical Servant's damage.
4 rounds, but because I'm so confident that even with this added damage the artificer is going to come in so far behind I'll say this thing hits it's bonus action attack.
4 attacks - 25% + 1 Bonus action attack.
This will look like this
1 attack of 1d8 + 4 and 3 attacks of 2d10 + 4
1d8 / 2 + 4 = 8 dmg
(3 x 2d10 / 2) + 12 = (6d10 / 2) + 12 = 42 dmg
42 + 8 = 50 dmg
So your Mechanical Servant does 50 dmg over those 4 rounds + the gun doing 78 dmg = 128 dmg
Battlemaster fighter Great Weapon 2d6. Remember +1 to the average of dice that hit the target because of the fighting stance.
(3 attacks x 4 rounds + 3 additional attacks from action surge) - 25% = 11 hits (+11 dmg from the fighting stance)
(11 x 2d6 / 2) + 55 = 66 + 55 + 11= 143 dmg
That is before battle maneuvers, if you were to also use your 5d10 to inflict more dmg or not miss an attack you would have at a minimum +25 DMG if you went just dmg.
Potentially 168 dmg
Battlemaster Dual Wield Rapiers 1d8. 4 attacks a turn
(4 attacks x 4 rounds + 4 additional attacks from action surge) - 25% = 15 attacks
(15 x 1d8 / 2) + 75 = 135dmg
That is before battle maneuvers, if you were to also use your 5d10 to inflict more dmg or not miss an attack you would have at a minimum +25 DMG. In this case though you certainly would want to be using precision attacks. Because if you hit the 5 missed attacks you get 5d8 / 2 + 25= 45 additional dmg
So at this point yes the artificer has some potential for catching up. . . But! The cost of 39% of it's dmg is very steep and flimsy. At level 12 the Mechanical Servant doesn't take much kill with so little hp and AC. It then costs you an incredible amount of money to replace it, if it beyond the typical means.
Going to make a separate post to address the last part, and help @DungeonLord58 with how magic items are made, and maybe it might make a little more sense to just how much/difficult it is to make the item I suggested.
"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)
Now then Magic items!
My last post on page 3 of this thread I outline magic item creation .
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)
So to answer your question DungeonLord58
The gold costs associated with creating a magical item is outlined on page 128-129 of the Dungeon Masters Guide with the cost associated with creating said item.
Magic Item Rarity costs can also be found on page 135 for the Dungeon Masters Guide
Now then let me painful break this down this item I had posted before.
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
While these items have a gold piece value attached you need to look at the BIGGER picture. And for the +1 version of this mod it is the GEM. That Gem isn't just found anywhere and does require some searching. So lets look to the DMG (Dungeon Masters Guide). So starting on page 133 you can read about Treasure tables, now read that. Then lets look at page 138.
A Gem of the caliber I'm suggesting to use for this mod is found in a Treasure Hoard of a Challenge Rating 11 - 16. Stop and think about that Challenge rating for a +1 item.
This is going up against an ADULT DRAGON at level 4. Hello TPK!!!
So, lets look at other options. This could be a prize in a contest, maybe a rich noble has one in his/her person and you can steal it. There are other options as well maybe you can purchase this gem, but it is very very unlikely to sold. Remember this Gem is Royalty level.
So did I just randomly pull something out of my back end without considerable thought? NO!
The price listed isn't even the full price.
Lets take the gem for example, Sure you might find a ruby of value but then you need to commission a gem cutter if you don't have the tools.
Also don't think you can just have all the tools, you get to pick 2 tools of which you don't actually start with, the only tools you start with are the thieves tools.
When you go gunsmith you also gain proficiency with smith tools which guess what you don't actually have!
These tools aren't cheap. pg 154 of the players hand book.
But for arguements sake lets say you took tinkerers tools and gem cutting tools. Congrats those are the 2 most expensive ones, hurray! 50gp and 25gp. And the Tinkerers are also the heaviest winning some serious awards here.
Proficiencies
Armor: Light and medium armor
Weapons: Simple weapons
Tools: Thieves’ tools, two other tools of your choice
Equipment
You start with the following equipment, in addition to the equipment granted by your background:
• (a) a handaxe and a light hammer or (b) any two simple weapons
• a light crossbow and 20 bolts
• (a) scale mail or (b) studded leather armor
• thieves’ tools and a dungeoneer’s pack
Gunsmith
A master of engineering, you forge a firearm powered by a combination of science and magic.
Master Smith
When you choose this specialization at 1st level, you gain proficiency with smith’s tools, and you learn the mending cantrip.
Figured I'd give those tidbits of info. That is a direct copy for the Artificers UA.
Anyhow but lets say you didn't take a tool or maybe you've yet to acquire them because maybe you aren't starting some where you can get them. Now you need to find NPCs to help you make these items. All of this takes time and guess what more money! So you may need 1 pound of silver valued at 5gp, but the npc wants 10 gold for his time to make the pieces you need. And that gem cutter well you might have brought him a gem worth 400gp but he wants 10% to cut it. so now you're up another 40gp and time to cut the gem.
Lets go another step and this gem has caught some intrigue from a local thieves guild and becomes the target of a heist.
Maybe the gem cutter isn't so honest and steals this, or if this was a stolen gem recognizes it and turns you into the authorities.
This magic item has had considerable thought in how this needs to be approached. The examples I've given are incredibly basic but if a good DM is out there they can see the potential is this.
I also want to point out that the value of a gem isn't based on it's size (Carats).
So for example; The key to a diamond's value is its rarity, and no two diamonds are alike. Rarity is determined by a diamond's unique characteristics as measured by the Four Cs: Cut, Color, Clarity and Carat Weight. (Thank you google)
These four Cs as it is used for diamonds are also used to determine the value of other gem stones like Rubies and Diamonds.
So when I put the pricing together for the gems I used the tables from the DMG because anything less than the lowest level ruby I suggested wouldn't have the size and clarity needed for the mod.
This mod isn't just something someone walks into a store and buys.
This myth that Diplomacy is carrying around of having a +3/3 at level 4 isn't realistically attainable.
edit; Hell you don't even need smith's tools from the background at level 3 you get to pick what set you want.
-Dresden White
"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)
Arcane Essence: why can't a wizard sorcerer see these fonts?
Modular items: Interesting but again the creation system within the dmg for magic items are very well outlined and I don't see the need to add something tied to the arcane essence system.
Defuse Magic: Is interesting but but just give the artificer spell list dispel magic.
So I'm not to aquainted with the alchemist side of the artificer, but the whole using of the Thunder Cannon with 1h isn't close. Weapons that drop 1 hand to use always do less damage. you don't have that so why would anyone ever use it two handed?
Why did you add the stipulation of only have 1 Thunder Cannon at a time?
Ok so the 2h version of Thunder Monger is scary and not usually the way things work. Again d6 for two hands, maybe d4 for a single handed.
I just realized you removed the Mechanical Servant from all sub classes and added a subclass for it alone. If you look at my numbers for how much damage the gunsmith is doing without the mechanical servant you are seriously gimping him, and he would require something to shore that up or there would be almost no value in having a guy that is just good with tools.
The constructor
Interesting it does touch on the idea that people have tossed around that it should be its own subclass but unfortunately I think it misses a few marks primarly in the choice the of addition of CR 4 Large or Medium Beast or Aberration. Level 9 aint a bad spot for the skill and cr 4 doesn't bother me. But why Aberration? and there aren't any CR4 Beasts
I'm not sold on the traps, as they currently are listed. It seem kind of odd with how they are dependent on the spell lists. If you look to the alchemist satchel and the arcane archer fighter archetype, and using these to come up with some trap ideas then I think you will have something much more interesting. Tying the spells into the traps goes into a grey area of who is maintaining concentration. So be careful how you approach this.
You also miss one of the largest opportunities where you could have addressed the many existing issues with the mechanical servant and that it doesn't scale. Leaving this mechanical servant to also level 9 makes the curve of playing this sub class a little painful. As you get something at level 1 that is subclass specific then nothing till level 9. No sub class does this I think you need to reconsider what you are wanting to achieve here.
The spell list changes...
Well I disagree with the addition of many of the spells, and disagree with some of the spells removed.
Damage spells should go, they aren't thematic with what the class originally had.
If you look closely to the list of spells that currently populate the list more are from the schools of Transmutation, and Abjuration. There are a few Divination ones and 1 or 2 if I remember correctly illusion spells and I think one is necromancy. So going from that any spells that are going to be added should likely come from these areas. And careful to not add spells that are offensive in nature as the spells that exist are supportive in nature. For example water walk/breathing, haste, aid, jump ect.
But yeah it's late, I think you need consider these as currently you have gutted two sub classes with the removal of the mechanical servant and haven't really replaced it with anything to prop them back up.
Cheers,
People think dmg doesnt have crafting but it really does. The only real problem i have with crafting is... The time... A simple potion of healing is taking 4 days. So what i did i simply changed days to hours effectively making this 8 times faster.
So my players can literally create stuff during long or short rest and once they finish the time. I require them a skill check with the necessary tools.
The goal of the money needed was just to stop the 3e problem of mages having infinite spells at 5th level thanks to scrolls and potions.
5e solved that by requiring more time to craft.
Artificer could have a feature that simply diminishes that time period even further. That solves all the problems. One could also solve the problem by simply saying he gains recipe and not the gear. But that breaks economy as he will create items for everyone.
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)
-Dresden White
Agreed time is a massive set back the DMG currently carries for crafting.