The artificer playtest article
Posted 8th July 2008 at 06:53 PM by Forgefly
Being a big Eberron fan, and even a big artificer fan, I couldn't resist the opportunity to try out Dragon Magazine's recent writeup of this class.
Before reading this article I was very curious how they could make the artificer work when the artificer seemed so entirely based in the rules of the vancian magic system and the magic item creation rules from the previous system.
After reading the article, my first response was: Wow! This is what artificers should have been before. Casting the Artificer in the Leader(controller) role(subrole) was a stroke of genius. The list of powers was interesting and compelling; even though only one build was presented, I found myself wanting to play through the artificer class a couple of times because of how good the power choices are. (This is something you won't hear me say about the fighter for instance)
In spite of being very impressed, I know that, to borrow a cliche, the proof is in the pudding, or in this case in the playing. After begging and pleading my GM allowed me to swap my elven cleric for a dwarven artificer. (it was only the second session so there wasn't much in the way of retcon) I had to promise that my healing capacity wouldn't go down, and that I wouldn't let down the party by switching away from the cleric. At the end of that session, everyone knew that the artificer could toe the line in the healing department.
The first session did give me some concerns however. My primary concern was that no one who played a artificer would ever want to play a cleric again. (or a warlord for that matter) This suggest that the character is a little overpowered. One of the two at will powers for the artificer allows the artificer to boost an ally's AC, damage the enemy, and push the enemy 1 square. This is essentially two at will powers (though the damage is a bit on the low side) Priest Shield (cleric) and tide of iron(fighter) except it's available at range. The balancing factor for this blending of powers is that it can only be used on an ally (targeting an adjacent enemy for the damage and the push) This makes sense in theory, but in practice I've never lacked enemies adjacent to allies. During the session in question we had two combat encounters, one against a solo and one against 4 normal goblins and 20 or so minions. In both of these encounters I could have used this power all but two rounds, and I suspect that this will be about par for the course.
Next Post, Caustic Bulwark
Before reading this article I was very curious how they could make the artificer work when the artificer seemed so entirely based in the rules of the vancian magic system and the magic item creation rules from the previous system.
After reading the article, my first response was: Wow! This is what artificers should have been before. Casting the Artificer in the Leader(controller) role(subrole) was a stroke of genius. The list of powers was interesting and compelling; even though only one build was presented, I found myself wanting to play through the artificer class a couple of times because of how good the power choices are. (This is something you won't hear me say about the fighter for instance)
In spite of being very impressed, I know that, to borrow a cliche, the proof is in the pudding, or in this case in the playing. After begging and pleading my GM allowed me to swap my elven cleric for a dwarven artificer. (it was only the second session so there wasn't much in the way of retcon) I had to promise that my healing capacity wouldn't go down, and that I wouldn't let down the party by switching away from the cleric. At the end of that session, everyone knew that the artificer could toe the line in the healing department.
The first session did give me some concerns however. My primary concern was that no one who played a artificer would ever want to play a cleric again. (or a warlord for that matter) This suggest that the character is a little overpowered. One of the two at will powers for the artificer allows the artificer to boost an ally's AC, damage the enemy, and push the enemy 1 square. This is essentially two at will powers (though the damage is a bit on the low side) Priest Shield (cleric) and tide of iron(fighter) except it's available at range. The balancing factor for this blending of powers is that it can only be used on an ally (targeting an adjacent enemy for the damage and the push) This makes sense in theory, but in practice I've never lacked enemies adjacent to allies. During the session in question we had two combat encounters, one against a solo and one against 4 normal goblins and 20 or so minions. In both of these encounters I could have used this power all but two rounds, and I suspect that this will be about par for the course.
Next Post, Caustic Bulwark
Total Comments 2
Comments
-
I wondered whether why anyone would want to play a cleric if the artificer was availible in my blog as well.
Sort of glad and sort of sad to see I was on the right track.
Though I think there is another way to look at it. The cleric sucks, at least the ranged build that's most comparable to the artificer. Their at wills a really unfun. Unlike the wizard they miss a lot (wizards usually do area, so they get lots of rolls and hit someone) and unlike strikers they don't do very much when they hit.
Sacred Flame can be ok at higher levels for the "free save" effect, but at lower levels (save ends) effects are rare. And they don't land often enough to really help by providing temporary hit points.
Lance of Faith is even more annoying. I think the real question is "why doesn't lance of faith just have something like Effect: on ally receives a +2 to hit your target".
(I have extraordinary difficulty imagining that that would be unbalancing).
The difference is so stark that I think the artificer is basically may also be a to test errata for the cleric.
Now to find some way to play an artificer....
Posted 9th July 2008 at 07:32 AM by Graf
-
An excellent analysis of the problems of the cleric. I've played one in two different 4e adventures so far and agree with you entirely.
I think there is an easy fix however. Give the cleric at least one ranged power that is weapon based. The proficiency bonus helps tremendously when it comes time to hit.
The other change I would make is to assign a subrole to the cleric. The paladin is a defender(leader) the ranger is a striker(controller) the warlord is a leader(defender) and then there is a cleric. The cleric is clearly a leader, but he doesn't seem to fit into a clear subrole. If he is also a leader(defender) why are his best powers both ranged. If he is a leader(controller) why can't he hit or heal multiple targets. If he is a leader(striker) why can't he do meaningful damage.
Thanks again for the comment, it was nice to see that I wasn't the only one who noticed this and as I mention, you provide a wonderful analysis of the cleric's problemsPosted 9th July 2008 at 02:00 PM by Forgefly
Total Trackbacks 0
And yet another word from our sponsors
