Second 5th Edition Survey! Plus Results of the First Survey: The Ranger Gets Some Attention!

A new survey is up on the official D&D website. It looks like its covering the classes not in the last survey and the recent Eberron material. WotC also reports on what was learned from the last survey. "For our second survey, we’re focused on the final six classes in the game and the Eberron material that we rolled out in last month’s Unearthed Arcana. If you haven’t looked at that article and want to provide feedback, read it over and come back to the survey later. Even if you don’t have a chance to use the Eberron material in your game, your reactions to it are helpful. You can also skip over the Eberron questions if you don’t want to give feedback on that material."

Here's the overall feedback from the first survey:

"So, what did we learn from our last survey? Let’s take a look at some trends:

To start with, there are a lot of you. We had more people respond to this survey than any of our playtest surveys. A lot of people are into D&D these days!

There are a lot of new players and DMs out there. Welcome to D&D!

You are playing the game in droves. Only about 10 percent of you have read the books without yet playing.

Your campaigns are just getting started. Most of you are playing at 6th level and below.

You love the fifth edition of Dungeons & Dragons, and we’re overjoyed to be able to write that. The overall assessment was incredibly positive, surpassing our results from the playtest by a significant margin."
​

The ranger, in particular, is getting some focus:

"To start with, a majority of players and Dungeon Masters are happy with the ranger overall. The game as a whole is grading well, so we don’t want to make a huge, sudden change to that class. But taking a deeper dive into the ranger, we can see that favored enemy and the beast master archetype received the lowest ratings. Our next step is to take a closer look at why that is.

We’ll start with an internal assessment mixed with feedback from our closed circle of testers. From there, we’ll work up some options and present them to you, most likely in the Unearthed Arcana column. That process allows us to determine if the track we’re on answers your concerns with the class.

The critical step is making sure that any changes we make genuinely improve the class. Remember, plenty of people are happy with the ranger, so any changes need to cover a number of options:

People who like the ranger as it is can simply keep playing their current characters.

People who don’t like the ranger should feel as though the new options allow them to play the ranger they want to create.

The new options are exactly that—new choices for ranger players to select from, as opposed to a rewrite of the Player’s Handbook.

DMs should always feel that they can take or leave the new options, just like any other material in the game beyond the Basic Rules."
​

Hop on over here to take the new survey!

 

[Remathilis]

Looking at the 4e version (and forgive me if I read it wrong, I didn't play 4e long and never played an artificer at all) lets glean more insights.

Role: Leader. Like 3e before it, it was mostly interested in laying on buffs. Unlike 3e, they came in the form of temporary "infusions" of magic (read: buffs to an item, not the wielder) and making one-and-done magic items. (Real items still fell to the ritual). As a leader though, he was responisble for one other thing: healing.

Weapons Armor: Surprisingly, Light armor (leather/cloth) and simple weapons. Less up front than the 3e version due to lack of medium armor.

Skills: Arcana, four other choices (including perception/thievery). Trapfinder is very viable.

Class Features: Arcane Empowerment (grant a one-time temp bonus or recharge a spent daily item), Healing infusion (heal an ally or grant temp hp), Arcane Rejuvenation (grant temp hp when an ally uses a daily power), Ritual casting (utility spells, and what is needed for permanent item construction).

The features give the artificer two major functions: healing/temp hp and item restoration. Not yet sure how these would work in 5e.

Builds: Two in the EPG: Tinker (more spell-like powers) and battlesmith ( buffing/weapon attacks). This reflects the major areas an artificer goes: spell-leaning and buffing combatant. The wizard archetype reflects the first well, but fails utterly at the second.

Powers: I'm not doing a blow-by-blow, but powers fall into some basic catergories.
Imbued Weapons: Combining a weapon attack (melee or ranged) with an effect (typically a buff to allies).
Temp Items: Creating a one-shot want, brief magical attack, or some "spell-like" attack. This is the "fireball using a wand" powers.
Summons: Not legitimately, but making or imbuing an item with sentience to make a mini golem.
Conjures: You pull an item out of nowhere and and use it, only to have it disappear later. Create mundane items or brief magical effects.
Buffs: Enchanting an item to give it a plus or replicate a magic item property (vampiric, icy burst, etc)
Healing: More stuff to give hp, temp hp, or remove conditions.

So 4e brought in more "attack" spells via temp items and healing via infusions. Not sure how that stirs into the mix, but it seems wizard isn't the best way to capture the healing element of it.

 

[Dausuul]

Okay, let's try to envision an artificer true to the spirit, and as much as possible the mechanics, of the original.

So, what's it look like in 5E? Probably a half-caster class, much like the paladin or ranger. That means spells can't be the class's primary shtick. Instead, I'd give it the ability to craft magic items--permanent ones, not mere consumables--from a specified list. Each time you gain a level, you can craft one new item, or enhance an item you've already crafted. You can also dismantle an item you crafted, reclaim its components, and craft another. This follows the pattern of the 3E artificer with an "XP pool" for crafting. By keeping the list tightly limited, you avoid the potential hazards of allowing open access to items in the DMG. (You can always ask the DM for permission to craft an item not on the list, but it's the DM's call.)

I'd follow the warlock as a rough model for this, with permanent item crafting taking the place of invocations. Your crafted items would be much more effective in your hands than anyone else's--other people can use them, but you're usually better off keeping them to use yourself.

Then throw in proficiency and maybe Expertise with thieves' tools, a few new spells just for artificers, and a handful of other perks, and you've got yourself a class.

 

[Fralex]

For me, a big part of the artificer class was their ability to access any class's spell list when making magic items. If they work out some way to keep that from being overpowered, that's a big step forward to me.

 

[dd.stevenson]

Personally I think it's DM's problem, and I am kind of happy that the game actually doesn't suit that well when the DM allows such thing, since I loath pet-heavy games.

That is, the game doesn't certainly break apart if you do... the Ranger's companion is already boosted compared to normal animals, and if the DM thinks it's not enough for his Pokemon-like setting, then it's up to him to houserule the Ranger's companion and boost it even more.

Geeze with the dismissive antagonism.

For the record, and as most posters in this thread are probably aware, there are lots of ways to keep pets below pokemon levels by without restricting pets to class features.

 

[yakuba]

I really like this subclass Artificer, but my view is more shaped by the fiction than it's previous class incarnations in 3e and 4e. A class that makes magic items and can 'magic up' items on the fly. The dissonance is that this Artificer 'can' cast spells, but you can also choose to always dump all spell slots into infusions. I'd like light armor proficiencies, but otherwise totally happy with it.

 

[Uchawi]

The biggest challenge for the artificer is the versions of D&D it existed in which is mainly 3E and 4E. 5E with the design focus on simplicity (bounded accuracy, limited magic item creation, limited rituals, simple armor or weapons, etc.) does not allow the class to be fully realized. It will be a pale version of it's former glory. The same problem exists for the Battlemaster (former warlord).

 

[Klaus]

Looking over the 3e and 4e artificer, here's an approximation summary:
- HD: as rogue
- Armor: as rogue
- Weapons: all simple weapons.
- Skills: Four from Sleight of Hand, Arcana, History, Medicine, Perception, Survival, Persuasion.
- Tools: Thieves' Tools, one set of artisan tools.

Features:
- Expertise: perhaps not at first level, but somewhere early on.
- Ritual Caster: as feat.
- Create Infusion (based on 4e version): this works like Channel Divinity (recharges with short rest, begins with 1, then 2 at 6th level and 3 at 18th level). When used, choose one of three effects: heal one ally; give a bonus to AC that can be ended by the target to get temp hp; grant resistance to a type of damage that can be ended by target to get immunity for 1 round.
- Arcane Empowerment: During a rest, you can empower one weapon or spellcasting focus (each individual item can only be empowered once per day). When making a weapon or spell attack with the item, the item's user can spend a bonus action to gain advantage on the roll.
- Spells:
Cantrips: Blade Ward, Guidance, Light, Mending, True Strike.
1st Level: Cure Wounds, Detect Magic, Healing Word, Shield of Faith, Identify.
2nd Level: Enhance Ability, Heat Metal, Magic Weapon
3rd Level: Protection from Energy, Mass Healing Word
4th Level: Fabricate, Otiluke's Resilient Sphere, Stoneskin
5th Level: Animate Objects, Mass Cure Wounds, Teleportation Circle, Wall of Force, Wall of Stone

Now, this assumes a 5e half-caster approach, which leaves out 6th level spells (such as Globe of Invulnerability or Blade Barrier), but offers some thematically-accurate choices (such as Animate Objects for impromptu construct-creating, and Teleportation Circle, which is important for Eberron).

To mimic the artificer's ease of creating magic items, the class would need a feature (perhaps expanding Create Infusion or Arcane Empowerment) to allow for imbuing simple effects onto items, such as changing an item's damage to an energy type, or increasing an armor's AC bonus. This could be linked to Attunement, creating a limit to the ammount of items that can be enhanced (a character would need to attune to the newly-enhancement item).

 

[Leatherhead]

Whenever I take these surveys, I seem to get different questions than everyone else.

I was also displeased with that take on the Artificer, no mechanical knowledge and the generic +1 or +2 bonuses to weapons or armor are totally boring. At least make it +1d6 elemental damage or resistances to different damage types, and give them some tool proficiency. Even then, I don't like using the wizard for their core. Wizards are all about learning every spell in the world, and possibly making a few new ones in the process. Giving them the burden of item research and creation on top of that is just too much for one PC to do.

As for making the Rogue into an artificer, I could see it. Rogues are the "MacGyver" class, relying on skill and cunning item use. They get the focused skill benefits, the ability to survive traps, the extremely narrow spell list, and as a bonus they have a nice scaling damage option to supplement the fact that they aren't supposed to cast the big spells all the time. The only thing that doesn't mesh is thieves' cant.

 

[Remathilis]

I'd follow the warlock as a rough model for this, with permanent item crafting taking the place of invocations. Your crafted items would be much more effective in your hands than anyone else's--other people can use them, but you're usually better off keeping them to use yourself.

Interestingly, I used the warlock as my template for a new class. You invent "prototypes" (Invocations) you alone can use, have "Infusions" (spells) that create quick enchanted items, "advanced learning" (high level slots) that represent big power draws, and then archetype (my two starting were homoculus master, a beastmaster knockoff; and alchemist (a potion maker).

I took some time off of it when I heard WotC was releasing their own artificer, but having seen it, I think I'll go back to finishing my work.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Interestingly, I used the warlock as my template for a new class. You invent "prototypes" (Invocations) you alone can use, have "Infusions" (spells) that create quick enchanted items, "advanced learning" (high level slots) that represent big power draws, and then archetype (my two starting were homoculus master, a beastmaster knockoff; and alchemist (a potion maker).

I took some time off of it when I heard WotC was releasing their own artificer, but having seen it, I think I'll go back to finishing my work.

Warlock was what I was thinking as well. Its a good, unique chassis, and what I based my warlord on (the idea of at will boosters and short encounter recharging strategems).