I think the problem I have with the criticism is that people are complaining that Tier IV encounters aren't challenging enough and that classes are being nerfed.  I wish they would pick a lane.  

Quote from Kipher >>

I think the problem I have with the criticism is that people are complaining that Tier IV encounters aren't challenging enough and that classes are being nerfed.  I wish they would pick a lane.  

 At this point no matter what wotc does, people will be angry. It's not out of reason, it's out of emotion

Quote from Kipher >>

I think the problem I have with the criticism is that people are complaining that Tier IV encounters aren't challenging enough and that classes are being nerfed.  I wish they would pick a lane.  

I mean, the problem with this is that:-

1.) Most of the classes did get buffed (or stayed more or less the same when they were good originally), and so did the monsters, so there's more nuance about the whole Tier 4 encounter business.

2.) The Artificer class at Tier 4 is significantly more powerful than the Artificer at Tiers 1 and 2 (where the actual complaints are leveled at for the most part). The Artificer at Tier 4 has Spell-Storing Item, Rare magic item plans, Flash of Genius, and six attunement slots. Anyone who says it sucks at that level is being disingenuous or didn't read the higher-level features.

3.) This is assuming the complaints are all coming from the same individuals, which they often don't.

I can't speak for the whole online D&D community, but when I complain about something like this, it's because I recognize that it could have been far better than it is, and wanted it to be so. If I didn't care about the class, and didn't care about it getting to shine, I wouldn't say anything about it.

Quote from NivekKevin >>

Quote from Kipher >>

I think the problem I have with the criticism is that people are complaining that Tier IV encounters aren't challenging enough and that classes are being nerfed.  I wish they would pick a lane.  

 At this point no matter what wotc does, people will be angry. It's not out of reason, it's out of emotion

And to this, it is true that WoTC can never please everyone, and it'd be pointless for them to try.

However, that does not invalidate criticisms in their game design. I've been observing the points people make in the "2025 Artificer is great actually" camp, and the arguments made for that have so far not impressed me. Why?

Because it usually takes the form of one of these things:-

1.) They're great at crafting, and they're at their best when crafting: Crafting is inherently a downtime activity thanks to the crafting system in place, and if the class under-performs outside this, it's an incomplete class given the nature of D&D as a game of adventurers who fight monsters and get loot.

2.) They have Spell-Storing Item: This is a Level 11 feature. What about the first 10 levels? Where the majority of games actually take place in.....

3.) They can take Dragonmarked Feats and get better spells on their list: This is true, but that is DM-dependent, as not all DMs would even allow these feats in the first place.

4.) It has Homunculus Servant: The Artificer isn't the only class in the game to get access to pets that can die in two hits. But as far as I know, no other base class in the game has to bring that pet up to justify itself in terms of combat prowess.

5.) I just find it fun: This is valid, and I will never say you shouldn't play the class if that's what you want to do. But you don't need to pretend it's better than it is to do so. The 2014 Monk had a similar issue where it had its defenders and its cult following, but in the end, the 2024 version proved that it needed glowing up on the base level.

Quote from Crawling_Chaos >>

I can't speak for the whole online D&D community, but when I complain about something like this, it's because I recognize that it could have been far better than it is, and wanted it to be so. If I didn't care about the class, and didn't care about it getting to shine, I wouldn't say anything about it.

 This is reasonable take. That said, most of this discussion has been people crying that the artifier was *nerfed*. Which is a completely different criticism. A criticism I frankly find unfounded, even at tier 1 -2.

I think that for me, having early access to +1 weapon(not to mention repeating shot, which ignores loading), +1 shield(Lvl 2) makes artificer pretty solid in Tier 1, I hit more consistently and harder than the rest of my party in Tier 1.  Certainly on par with any other classes before subclass feature.  Our DM doesn't really allow +1 in Tier 1 typically.  

I think Tier 2 will be a little dicier as best things artificer gets are at lvl 6 & 7.  Still gets extra attack, with +1 range weapon that ignores loading, so should get a solid lvl 5 boost.  Homunculus is decent summon, it's tiny so it can hide on your person and has evasion (and decent stats), so it has a solid chance to ignore AoE damage.  It also can use items, which is sweet.  

Comments about Tier IV encounters being more balanced are good to see, we are going to Tier IV persumably (6 year gaming group went to 20 last campaign), but I won't find out for a while as we are XP based and are role play leaning (though we do get RP XP, it's usually small chunks 25, 50)  

I like the identity of my dude, I'm enjoying playing him.  I think people will be creative and find ways to make the class effective.  Our DM is permissive of outside the box solutions, so it's often not the most powerful spells, but the most creative spell use that wins big encounters.  I do think the artificer spell list could be a bit longer, but I expect that people will find that at level 6 they will have crafted some good items, have 3 items and 6 plans they can use for resource management (Artificer should effectively have a few more spell slots perday with lvl 6 feature, especially with items that are disposible (ie wand of web/fireball)  I think gold will be a big constraint on artificer, so DMs should weigh how much gold they want to give out to parties, knowing the artificer will be trying to craft with any gold that they have.  Note: Spell scrolls you craft using your spell DC can be really effective to for scribing lower level spells that have solid spell DCs.  The scrolls use the crafter's DC, so you can hand your martial a spell with DC 18 in Tier 2 which is pretty good. Outside of the Rogue the artificer should be the best or one of the best skill monkey's in the game(though my character is terrible at conversation skills), which in RP heavy environments tend to lean towards.  

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm debating taking Keen Mind or Observant Feat to be able to use skill checks in battle.  If there was a way to get more bonus actions my Battlesmith would be an absolute beast, IMO.  It will not do 2014 paladin damage ever, but that's not the identity or expectation. 

Quote from ArodGem >>

Quote from Crawling_Chaos >>

I can't speak for the whole online D&D community, but when I complain about something like this, it's because I recognize that it could have been far better than it is, and wanted it to be so. If I didn't care about the class, and didn't care about it getting to shine, I wouldn't say anything about it.

 This is reasonable take. That said, most of this discussion has been people crying that the artifier was *nerfed*. Which is a completely different criticism. A criticism I frankly find unfounded, even at tier 1 -2.

1. The theme has changed. Infusing existing objects with magic was a step in magic item creation. Now, they poof items into existence and delete their conjurations for various effects. That's not crafting. That's an inanimate object summoner class.
2. Tinker's Magic is a trip to the store instead of the more thematic and useful Magical Tinkering ability.
3. Tool Expertise was extremely good, particularly in 2024. The skill monkey aspect has unquestionably been nerfed.
4. At level 10+ we could craft more than anyone. At level 14+, we could attune more items than anyone else. We can craft our specialty's items faster at level 3+ but the attunement abilities were flat-out nerfed. Crafting is a bit of a give and take but overall were nerfed.
5. The class is generally stronger in combat, but that is not the reason all of us play Artificers. Eberron, in particular, is a setting where other aspects of the game other than smash and grab shine and those are the areas where WotC just failed us.

I think this is all valid, I think one reason infusions are gone is that people got creative and found broken mechanics to take advantage of.  The current system is more on rails so they don't have to contain more possible outcomes.  

Quote from Kipher >>

I think this is all valid, I think one reason infusions are gone is that people got creative and found broken mechanics to take advantage of.  The current system is more on rails so they don't have to contain more possible outcomes.  

With this logic, the devs should redesign the whole spellcasting part of D&D. People got creative and found broken mechanics to take advantage of. :) 

Quote from Kipher >>

I think this is all valid, I think one reason infusions are gone is that people got creative and found broken mechanics to take advantage of.  The current system is more on rails so they don't have to contain more possible outcomes.  

Infusions are "gone" in the sense that they are still here but instead of requiring the base item, you summon it wholesale. You can't infuse +1 AC on a suit of armor you found at level 2 now but can summon cast-away plate armor (1,500 GP armor) which is kind of the same thing for a heavy armor user (Armorer at level 3+ or another party member).

If Infusions were broken, they are more broken now because no infusions that I am aware of were removed from Tasha's to Forge of the Artificer, only added. Some of the options added in the first play test (such as Enspelled Armor) was removed, but nothing from Tasha's and Eberron: Rising from the Last War.

Were you talking about another feature? Because "infusions are gone" is pretty far from the truth. Replicate Magic Item is for all practical purposes, more powerful but less thematic than Infuse Item.

I am just saying instead of being able to give an item a feature, which might not have a magic item equivalent, you can only conjure an item from a list.  I think their goal was just to limit the list of potential items, so that players didn't create overpowered combinations of items.  

Quote from Kipher >>

I am just saying instead of being able to give an item a feature, which might not have a magic item equivalent, you can only conjure an item from a list.  I think their goal was just to limit the list of potential items, so that players didn't create overpowered combinations of items.  

I mean, at Level 10, you can create up to four Uncommon Wondrous Items. Doesn't matter what they are, as long as they're all different from each other and aren't cursed.

I imagine there's abuse potential in there, even if none exists yet. And considering how often players like to abuse items like the Immovable Rod or the Decanter of Endless Water, yeah.

People love to hype up Spell-Storing Item, but Level 10 just giving you access to almost the whole Uncommon Wondrous Item list is incredibly strong compared to what Artificer could do before that level. It's like the designers made Levels 1 to 9 very "safe", which makes it look weaker than it should be to many (including myself), and then at Level 10 onwards, they just throw caution to the wind lol. Not that I have a problem with that, but I kinda wish they were more consistent about it throughout.

In some ways the strongest aspect of it is the number of attunement slots.  Given the crafting rules and the fairly unrestricted lists that you can draw on for replicate magic item.  I do think getting a +1 weapon and or shield (though I don't know how you pass up the utility of the Manifold Tool, which basically should give you advantage a lot on skill checks) at level 2 makes it pretty effective early, maybe a bit less so for 6-9, and then it's right back up there.  Still Boots of the Winding Path, Sentinel Shield, Pipes of Haunting, Wand of Magic Missile/Web, etc all are pretty great items, so yeah you're not getting a huge damage increase in Tier 2 probably, but advantage on stealth, perception, initiative, and increased spell casting without using (limited) spell slots.  

I do think a Wizard/Cartographer is going to be a really nice utility build.  You can get a ton of ritual spells and have them in your spell book, cast they through the map if they require touch, a skill expertise, you could further combine with rogue/thief and get expertise and get Fast Hands, which is pretty great.  I think there's enough cool stuff to do to make it fun to play.  

Given potential builds, and the different types of utility they can provide, I don't really think Artificer's damage should scale with a blaster or maximized Melee damage build.  

Quote from Kipher >>

In some ways the strongest aspect of it is the number of attunement slots.  Given the crafting rules and the fairly unrestricted lists that you can draw on for replicate magic item.  I do think getting a +1 weapon and or shield (though I don't know how you pass up the utility of the Manifold Tool, which basically should give you advantage a lot on skill checks) at level 2 makes it pretty effective early, maybe a bit less so for 6-9, and then it's right back up there.  Still Boots of the Winding Path, Sentinel Shield, Pipes of Haunting, Wand of Magic Missile/Web, etc all are pretty great items, so yeah you're not getting a huge damage increase in Tier 2 probably, but advantage on stealth, perception, initiative, and increased spell casting without using (limited) spell slots.  

I do think a Wizard/Cartographer is going to be a really nice utility build.  You can get a ton of ritual spells and have them in your spell book, cast they through the map if they require touch, a skill expertise, you could further combine with rogue/thief and get expertise and get Fast Hands, which is pretty great.  I think there's enough cool stuff to do to make it fun to play.  

Given potential builds, and the different types of utility they can provide, I don't really think Artificer's damage should scale with a blaster or maximized Melee damage build.  

That's all well and good, but I was addressing your point about WoTC not wanting to have the class features be abusable. And I'm saying that if that was their goal, they seemed to stop caring about that from Level 10 onwards.

Quote from Kipher >>

I am just saying instead of being able to give an item a feature, which might not have a magic item equivalent, you can only conjure an item from a list.  I think their goal was just to limit the list of potential items, so that players didn't create overpowered combinations of items.  

What I mean is look at what they lost versus what they gained. They lost:

• Arcane Propulsion Armor (overlapped heavily with the Armorer's Infiltrator Armor Model)
• Arcane Propulsion Arm (weaponized magical prosthetic)
• Armor of Magical Strength 

Ventilating Lungs were not reprinted in Forge of the Artificer so the Eberron: Rising from the Last War stats apply and it can be replicated at level 14.

That's all: 3 Items. Everything else from the original class carried over and a ton of options were added. Some of the original options changed. Armor +1 now requires level 6, Armor +2 now requires level 14, Resistant Armor renamed to Armor of Resistance, Ring of Water Walking now requires level 10, and Ventilating Lungs now requires level 14.

No, the potential list is not functionally limited. It is greatly expanded.

They might not have accomplished their goal! I just see a lot of people saying the new mechanics are more limited, though I don't see it that way.  I would flavor replicate magic item as crafting the item in your workshop overnight?  We are playing gritty realism, so our long rests are 7 days and thematically it makes sense in our campaigns, like an inspired bit of crafting or the finishing touches on a long term passion project.  

I understand that people don't like the magical tinkering option being changed (they can just be a rock gnome?)

The manifold tool I think does a lot to mitigate the loss of expertise in the orginal class.  Tool proficiency with a given skill when you have proficiency in that skill now gives advantage on the roll.  They seem to be trying to make the tool proficiencies act consistently with regards to tools, so I don't think that's as big a nerf with the new rules regarding proficiency with tools and skills overlapping. Now you are getting advantage on ALL tool checks with proficient skills which seems solid, over the probably 4 tool proficiencies you used to have getting expertise.  It scales a bit differently, but advantage is more reliable for roles than expertise, especially with flash of genius added.  

Maybe they need a "crafting" skill, and artificers would automatically be proficient at level 1 and get expertise at level 6?  Have that as a solid limit on the new crafting rules which are OP in campaigns with downtime built in.  If you're in a campaign that's non stop action and a series of monsters and heists, than a lot of what artificer brings doesn't seem to fit with that type of campaign, just be a fighter.  Then to craft Armor, you would need Smith (or Leatherworkers) Tools proficiency and the crafting skill (Int?).  you get advantage and have DC based on the rarity of the armor you are crafting.  You need to succeed on the DC for each X number of days you spend crafting, or if you succeed by more than 5 or 10 you reduce the total number of days needed.  That would make crafting a little better I think.  

Quote from Kipher >>

I understand that people don't like the magical tinkering option being changed (they can just be a rock gnome?)

What if they don't want to be a Rock Gnome? Why are we limiting stuff like this that reasonably anyone in-universe should be able to do by species?

I'm not personally broken up about the original Magical Tinkering being gone, but I've seen some others say how they made creative use of it and miss it as a result, and saying they can play a species they may or may not want to play is not great.

Quote from Kipher >>

Maybe they need a "crafting" skill, and artificers would automatically be proficient at level 1 and get expertise at level 6?  Have that as a solid limit on the new crafting rules which are OP in campaigns with downtime built in.  If you're in a campaign that's non stop action and a series of monsters and heists, than a lot of what artificer brings doesn't seem to fit with that type of campaign, just be a fighter.  Then to craft Armor, you would need Smith (or Leatherworkers) Tools proficiency and the crafting skill (Int?).  you get advantage and have DC based on the rarity of the armor you are crafting.  You need to succeed on the DC for each X number of days you spend crafting, or if you succeed by more than 5 or 10 you reduce the total number of days needed.  That would make crafting a little better I think.  

Yes, I think there should be a Crafting skill. I'd probably make it Intelligence-based by default, so it synergizes with the Artificer.

Quote from Crawling_Chaos >>

Quote from Kipher >>

I understand that people don't like the magical tinkering option being changed (they can just be a rock gnome?)

 

What if they don't want to be a Rock Gnome? Why are we limiting stuff like this that reasonably anyone in-universe should be able to do by species?

I'm not personally broken up about the original Magical Tinkering being gone, but I've seen some others say how they made creative use of it and miss it as a result, and saying they can play a species they may or may not want to play is not great.

  Totally agree with you, to me the ribbon ability isn't that big of a deal, I like being able to produce lets say a gappling hook, when I don't have the strength to carry all the items in adventuring gear in my bag.  Gritty Realism is super limiting.  Especially at early levels with no spell slots. 

Why remove Tool Expertise? That ability has been a godsend!

Quote from Kipher >>

They might not have accomplished their goal! I just see a lot of people saying the new mechanics are more limited, though I don't see it that way.  I would flavor replicate magic item as crafting the item in your workshop overnight?  We are playing gritty realism, so our long rests are 7 days and thematically it makes sense in our campaigns, like an inspired bit of crafting or the finishing touches on a long term passion project.

It makes sense in your house rules, but not in the core rules. Summoning up a suit of plate armor overnight is silly. Instilling magic into an existing item is in line with the (barely) existing crafting rules.

Quote from Kipher >>

I understand that people don't like the magical tinkering option being changed (they can just be a rock gnome?)

Why should I play a specific race to get back my class ability?

Quote from Kipher >>

The manifold tool I think does a lot to mitigate the loss of expertise in the orginal class.  Tool proficiency with a given skill when you have proficiency in that skill now gives advantage on the roll.  They seem to be trying to make the tool proficiencies act consistently with regards to tools, so I don't think that's as big a nerf with the new rules regarding proficiency with tools and skills overlapping. Now you are getting advantage on ALL tool checks with proficient skills which seems solid, over the probably 4 tool proficiencies you used to have getting expertise.  It scales a bit differently, but advantage is more reliable for roles than expertise, especially with flash of genius added.  

Not really. We used to have expertise with all tool proficiencies. All-purpose Tool (Tasha's Cauldron of Everything) already did that and gave you a +1 to +3 on your spell attack rolls and saves and gave you an extra cantrip. It wasn't a magic item could replicate but now it is at level 10 if you don't find or craft one sooner. Everything the Manifold does, the All-purpose Tool and more. The Manifold Tool is just easier to get (Infuse at level 2 or craft for faster). If you are crafting a Manifold Tool, you probably can craft a +1 All-purpose Tool and it is worth the extra expense/time (10 days and 200 GP versus 5 days and 50 GP).

Now, don't get me wrong. I predicted that when they updated the class, we would lose Expertise. In order to make tool proficiencies relevant for more characters, they created an awkward pseudo skill role for them and Tool Expertise was too powerful as it was. I am happy with Magic Item Tinker. Though I will probably house rule that Charge Magic Item works with any magic item. 

Quote from Kipher >>

Maybe they need a "crafting" skill, and artificers would automatically be proficient at level 1 and get expertise at level 6?

This is the root of the problem. We need a proper crafting system. The game had a crafting system in earlier editions and the Artificer was amazing within it. In 5.14, they gutted crafting and reduced it to a minimal framework with some handwaving. (I don't think they had a crafting system in 4e, but 5e is a bit of a return to 3.5) 5.24 beefed it up slightly but it is still barely there.

3.5 crafting cost character experience to create magic items and had specific requirements for magic items, even if they didn't cast spells. The requirements could be a race, class/level, spell, or something else. Artificers could fake the requirements with Use Magic Device and could even make weaker versions at a lower level. For example, a Wand of Fireballs could normally be crafted at 5th level and deal 5D6 damage per fireball. An Artificer could start making them at 3rd level dealing only 3D6 damage. An Artificer got a reserve of points that they could use to craft magic items instead of experience points and could destroy magic items to add to the reserve. An Artificer could fool existing magic items to bypass the requirements and received a bonus if they could create them. Their Homunculus could craft on their behalf, expending the Artificers resources but the Homunculus would spend the time to actually craft the item. (Sometimes inside a portable hole. Yay, labor conditions!) They could use magic items better than other characters.

Pretty much all of the essence of the original Artificer class is gone. If you didn't play it in the early days, you won't really see it. This is no longer a crafter that can leverage their tools and the equipment they made for themselves and the party to make the group more effective. This is a pale imitation.

Quote from Kipher >>

If you're in a campaign that's non stop action and a series of monsters and heists, than a lot of what artificer brings doesn't seem to fit with that type of campaign, just be a fighter.  Then to craft Armor, you would need Smith (or Leatherworkers) Tools proficiency and the crafting skill (Int?). 

I mean every campaign has the potential to use Bastions for crafting magic items as long as your game uses Bastions. That equalizes downtime activities between your example campaign types but also downplays the Artificer further.