Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Introduces The Artifcer

I don't think anyone saw this coming!

 

[Waterbizkit]

Speaking only for myself, if a player opted to have a mechanical raven, owl or other similar smaller beast for their clockwork buddy I'd let them in a heartbeat. When. You can have a giant bat (flying mount perhaps?), a saber-toothed tiger, a dire wolf, so on and so on... and you pick a raven for roleplay and/or flavor reasons I'm certainly not going to quibble with you.

 

[Staffan]

Now this is an artificer I can get behind! (Because I wouldn't want to be in front of her when she's throwing alchemist's fire all over the place - hah!)

I like it. It's not quite what I would have done, but this has more of its own identity (mine was more of a reskinned Bard). On the first read-through, there are three things I'd add:

1. This is highly campaign-dependent (based on how much item creation the DM allows, so maybe there should be a sidebar about it), but the core identity of the 3e artificer was creating and use of magic items. They had the ability to use the skill Use Magic Device to bypass item creation requirements, primarily that of spellcasting. For example, if you wanted to make a pair of boots of the winterlands, you needed cat's grace, endure elements, and pass without trace. But the artificer had a very good chance of making them anyway. To reflect this ability in 5e, I would put in something like this:

Arcane Polyglot: The artificer is a master of using and crafting a diverse array of magic items. An artificer ignores any requirements on attuning to a magic item. If the campaign allows for PCs crafting their own magic items, an artificer would be able to bypass any spell knowledge requirement on the item, as long as the artificer's level is at least twice as high as the spell level. Example: In his campaign, Staffan has decided that in order to craft a Staff of the Woodlands you need to use the heartwood of the oldest tree in a major forest, with the permission of a treant native to the area. You would also need inlays from a certain number of rare trees, placed in a precise pattern portraying various animals. You also need to expend a few thousand gp worth of other components, and cast a number of spells including wall of thorns each day of the crafting. Nikolaj is playing an artificer in Staffan's campaign - he needs to buy/make all the stuff, and spend the time, but he does not need to cast any spells, and once the staff is finished he can attune to it even though he's not a druid.

2. I'm not too fond of the limited spells known for an artificer. Having full access to their whole, albeit rather limited in focus, spell list was one of the cool things about them in 3e.

3. There needs to be a clarification on how Concentration works regarding Infuse Item. I would have the item's user be the one concentrating on the spell (which would enhance the artificer's role as a buff specialist), but I could see it either way, and it needs to be clarified.

This would be the first 4th level casting class (half cast round down?). Interesting that it doesn't give cantrips, so it is more like the paladin/ranger classes than eldritch knight/arcane spell thief subclasses.

It might not give cantrips per se, but the Satchel and Thunder Cannon serve the same purpose.

 

[vpuigdoller]

This works way better as a stand alone class for sure. I love it, I would tone down the free magic item a lil bit, give it at later level or something. I really liked this UA.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

As for other subclasses, yes I feel there should be a companion focused subclass maybe with some allowances for a Dr. Frankenstein or Dr. Moreau concepts which might make the companion undead or a monstrosity.

A rune-based subclass with heavy armour and melee weapon focus might be another concept to run with.

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

Another thought is given the beast guideline for Mechanical Servant, I guess an Artificer can definitely be riding around on a mechanical horse...

something like this one ?
View attachment 79841

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

On the whole, I dig the class, but that feature bugs me as well. I feel like there needs to be something there, but the concept of the class just getting, so to speak, a free magic item bothers me. I don’t know what the solution is, though. The increase to attuned items, that on the other hand, I rabidly dislike. I would prefer not to see that mechanic monkeyed with.

I'm not very fond of the Wondrous Invention feature. While the listed magic items are utilitarian, they are still free magic items!

 

[dropbear8mybaby]

This is the best UA for a long time. Polished and balanced. So far I can't see any reason why I wouldn't allow it in a game. After the barely Alpha stuff we've been getting of late, this is a surprising and refreshing change.

 

[ad_hoc]

I think they did a great job on it. This might be the best UA article to date.

I was never a fan of previous incarnations of the artificer. I like the idea of them, but never the implementation.

I think this does it perfectly. The key was to remove their full spellcaster status.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I like it in concept. Some mechanical choices are neat, but I think it lacks focus. I'd like to see a version that's more easily comparable to other classes, and with a clear role in an adventuring party. Right now, it remembers me of the 3.X bard.

 

[RotGrub]

5e might not have magical item shops by default, but it sure has magical item factories. Entitlement assembly lines now stretch all the way back to the previous edition.

This is why UA is outlawed at my table.