Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Introduces The Artifcer

I don't think anyone saw this coming!

 

[Jer]

This. When magic items could just be bought and sold in 4e, they felt significantly less exciting and special. Instead, they became just another part of PC builds. With 5e, magic items started to feel, well, magical again. I don't mind PCs crafting magic items, but I feel like they should require quests and efforts, be a momentous undertaking. Not just "boom, you gained a level and get a free magic item."

But if you're playing in a campaign with artificers, you've already decided "magic items aren't going to be so rare". Otherwise, why have artificers?

The classic use for artificers is in a setting like Eberron - where streetlamps are lit by apprentices with wands of light and wands of magic missile aren't an uncommon item. If you're not playing in a world like that then you shouldn't have artificers. And if you are playing in a world like that, then the artificer's powers seem reasonable (though I'd want to do some at-the-table play to be sure).

This clearly isn't a class that is meant for every setting.

 

[TwoSix]

This. When magic items could just be bought and sold in 4e, they felt significantly less exciting and special. Instead, they became just another part of PC builds. With 5e, magic items started to feel, well, magical again. I don't mind PCs crafting magic items, but I feel like they should require quests and efforts, be a momentous undertaking. Not just "boom, you gained a level and get a free magic item."

Doesn't gaining levels require "quests and effort"? I feel like you mean that crafting a magic item should require extra layer of narrative, on top of whatever the party is normally doing.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I certainly like that the artificer is more steampunk flavoured, I think it helps address something that would be an elephant in the room when dealing with Artificers.

More thoughts on the Artificer thunder cannon, I think that it your campaign allows firearms any other firearm can be substituted in, so that conceivably it could be a pistol if the player wanted. I think the fact the other abilities are special actions, prevents them from being used twice in a round even if multiple shot firearms like pepperboxes or revolvers were involved and they multiclassed to get a second attack. Plus you could still rule that the special attacks still needs a bonus action to load in a special round. The idea to substitute a different type of firearm, can be used for the crossbow or bow ideas and so on too.

I noticed the alchemist's healing draught can be used only once per long rest on the subject healed, but the Artificer could cast or infuse Cure Wounds.

 

[Ath-kethin]

Oh, also I liked the nod to Mystara in the intro bit. We don't get enough of that.

 

[ad_hoc]

This. When magic items could just be bought and sold in 4e, they felt significantly less exciting and special. Instead, they became just another part of PC builds. With 5e, magic items started to feel, well, magical again. I don't mind PCs crafting magic items, but I feel like they should require quests and efforts, be a momentous undertaking. Not just "boom, you gained a level and get a free magic item."

If gaining a level is not a momentous undertaking, then I propose that you should make it harder to gain levels in your game.

----------------------

I am completely fine with the gun. It's not really a gun in the fiction because there are no guns. There is just a person using their magical powers to make a stick go boom.

Introducing the artificier class doesn't mean that guns need to be introduced to the campaign world.

 

[flametitan]

The biggest boon I realized with the Alchemist is that it opens up the potential for more generic items on the equipment list. I can see Smoke Sticks, Tanglefoot, and the swift-step draught being available to purchase for 50-100 gp.

 

[Thurmas]

Ireally like these two classes, more then I think most of the UAs that have come out. A few things struck me after reading them though.

The two subclasses are way too similar to one another, with many over lapping abilities that seem to differentiate themselves more with fluff then with actually abilities.

Even given all these abilties, there is no real way to craft lasting magical items or potions or anything else. Everything is a one of or temporary in nature.

The Gunsmith is way closer to what I wish the Arcane Archer UA had been similar to. I that UA had granted it similar abilities. Personally, I wouldn't use it as an actual gun user for flavor reasons, but I think a rod wielder would be awesome.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Doesn't gaining levels require "quests and effort"? I feel like you mean that crafting a magic item should require extra layer of narrative, on top of whatever the party is normally doing.

I think he does. I am generally pro-artificer, but I feel like you should have to work getting some specific ingredients/components from the activities of one of the levels prior to making the item. There is precedent: any dimension hoping spell that requires you to have a key attuned to the plane you are going to, or (much to Cappn Zapp's horror), planar binding which no longer opens up portals to grab outsiders, so you to go out and find them if you want to bind anything (unless you can cast 9th level spells). Of course, in Eberron, MagicMart is open 24/7, so it is easier there, and in Planescape, there is always someone will to trade you ingredients for a small part of your soul......

 

[cbwjm]

Admittedly I am filtering this through my years of DMing, but I think part of my "not very fond" is that I'm having problems seeing past the fact that they are getting magic items, for free, that most characters have to spend a good majority of their careers adventuring for.

Or maybe I'm just very stingy with magic items to my players...

If you have a setting where magic items aren't that common then I wouldn't include the artificer as a playable class since I see it as a class for a world like Eberron where magical items are relatively common. For other worlds, I'd restrict it. I probably wouldn't include the artificer in my current setting, it doesn't really have a place in it.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Can't say as I agree. (Outside of agreeing that racial type subclasses would be great for this class.) Outside of the mechanical servant, most of the tech elements are imbedded in the subclasses. And you could easily have a more shamanistic subclass that makes the mechanical servant into a fey, for example. I could easily make an elven artificer that feels a lot like a ranger, for example, with only light reskinning. (Thunder Cannon becomes Arcane Bow, and the Mechanical Servant becomes a beast.)

We might disagree on this because of your preference for story elements being imbedded in the class, over my preference for viewing classes as holders of mechanics. Can't help you there, I'm afraid. Maybe there's a 12 step program.

The construct companion is the big roadblock there. The general focus on making items is also an important thing to consider: a broader theme might focus more on the "magic" angle (fantasy) and less on the "crafting" angle (industrial age).

Sure, but allowing conversion of levels into items is far less problematic than allowing conversion of gold, or XP, or time into items. Allowing other magic items to be turned into crafted items would just bring back 4e residuum. Fundamentally, you can't have an artificer with ANY magic item crafting abilities that isn't going to cut into the novelty factor of finding your own magic items. At least by limiting it to a small selection of items gained at only a few points in your adventuring career, you're still keeping the bulk of magic items interesting. This way, they're more like class features that you can hand me down when you get bored with them.

You can have an artificer without the ability to craft magic items from the DMG that satisfies "creating magic items" as well as rewarding characters who find magic items.

I mean, the simplest way, off-the-cuff, is to have some ritual spells that artificers learn that can mimic magic items. Knowing the comprehend languages ritual doesn't generally invalidate the appeal of a helm of comprehend languages, for instance, and having an artificer who just cast comprehend languages as a ritual into a helmet that someone could wear means that there's still a delight in finding a helmet that does that all the time. (This also mitigates the "homebody crafter" issue, since the item the artificer makes isn't just something she can give to her allies and send them on their way).

Honestly, you could scrap the whole free magic item thing in exchange for ritual caster, a spellbook/recipe book (which they should have anyway! # of spells known?! Bah!), and maybe a few well-placed rituals that mimic/ennable magic item abilities.

I really don't see this one. The artificer is a rogue, first and foremost. They do excellent damage which is lost without their presence. They CAN'T craft new items unless they're out gaining XP and levels. Their infusions last 8 hours, max. I agree that they don't need to make a ton of "artificing decisions" outside of where to deploy their few spell slots, but moving them away from being a full caster is pretty strong signal that was the designer's intent.

Reading the subclasses more closely, it seems like they've put a good handle on it there. The main class has this issue (8 hours is plenty of time to run out and bash some gobbos and come back to camp), but the subclasses don't really. The way they accomplish it is a little artificial, but it's flavorful, so I'm cool with giving them a pass there. Though I'm a bit concerned about the "short-rest-recharge healing" offered by the healing drought, that's a specific quibble.

A minor ability that works in conjuction with their crafting ability to supprt both low and high item campaigns.

A high campaign variability is not a desirable thing in a class, I'd think - you want it to be broadly useful, in a variety of campaigns. Otherwise, it's for a small niche of your audience. Could be OK, but if the goal is to get the class into the hands of players, not really what you're aiming for.

Beasts are the safest choice for any sort of shapechanging or companion ability, due to the predictability of their advancement and abilities. And you can describe them any way you want. So you could use a bear's stats, for example, and just describe them as a burly humanoid. I agree that if you really wanted to build a C-3PO you're out of luck, but that seems addressable via subclasses in the future.

Narrowly speaking, it's possible that crafting a mechanical companion might be one sharp corner that needs a good sanding off. Possibly, find familiar-with-construct-option would make a good replacement.

If you can't give me a golem-maker, don't pretend like this is adequate. Give me a golem-maker, or go home!

More than anything, I appreciate the boldness, but I think there's a lot more clever design here than you may be giving them credit for.

Boldness is good. For UA, I'd rather see bold messes than safe, sanitized options. In published products, maybe a bit more sanitation.