Revised Artificer Survey now available - Page 4
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 130
  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Farquhar View Post
    No matter how un-fun it is to play or how many more years we have to wait...
    I thought the bottle Alchemist was incredibly fun to play, but I know many people disliked it. Either way, the Homunculus version seems to be the least popular version to date, even if the core abilities of the Artificer in general have been improved.

  2. #32
    Member
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)



    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    2,076
    The alchemist doesn't have to have a homunculus, just view it as one more thing they know how to make.

    The best way to improve the feel of the alchemist is to expand the artificer-exclusive spell list and the infusion list, and that can come later.

    The simple addition of the Repeating Shot infusion makes a gun-artificer perfectly viable, provided the DM is willing to let you craft one of the DMG firearms.

  3. #33
    Member
    A 1e title so awesome it's not in the book (Lvl 21)



    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    2,431
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Farquhar View Post
    Speaking as someone who has actually tried the infinite-bottles-satchel Alchemist in actual play, I can tell you this: it sucks! Boring and repetitive, difficult to keep track of who has used it's healing potions, bitty and unfocused, and it has a spell list as well!

    I've also played the spells-refluffed-as-potions Alchemist in Pathfinder, and you know what? It works really well.

    So there comes a point when you have to throw out the high concepts and exotic mechanics and settle for what is fun to actually play.
    Kind of a false dichotomy there. Infinite bottles and spells refluffed as potions are not the only options.

  4. #34
    Member
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)



    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    2,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlaquin View Post
    Kind of a false dichotomy there. Infinite bottles and spells refluffed as potions are not the only options.
    I haven't seen any better suggestions (and the refluffed potions works well in Pathfinder, if it aint broke).

  5. #35
    Member
    A 1e title so awesome it's not in the book (Lvl 21)



    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    2,431
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Farquhar View Post
    I haven't seen any better suggestions (and the refluffed potions works well in Pathfinder, if it aint broke).
    I mean, I disagree that it ain’t broke. If all we’re doing is reskinning spells as potions, what do we need an Artificer for in the first place? We’ve already got a perfectly good Wizard we can say is making potions if we want to do that.

    As for a better suggestion, I’d leverage Infusions. We’ve already got a Replicate Magic Item Infusion. Add scrolls, potions, and wands to the list of things it can replicate, or make a separate “Replicate Consumable” Infusion, give the Artificer a few more Infusions per day, and bob’s your uncle.
    Last edited by Charlaquin; Sunday, 2nd June, 2019 at 04:55 AM.
    XP SkidAce gave XP for this post

  6. #36
    Member
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)



    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    2,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlaquin View Post
    I mean, I disagree that it ain’t broke. If all we’re doing is reskinning spells as potions, what do we need an Artificer for in the first place? We’ve already got a perfectly good Wizard we can say is making potions if we want to do that.

    As for a better suggestion, I’d leverage Infusions. We’ve already got a Replicate Magic Item Infusion. Add scrolls, potions, and wands to the list of things it can replicate, or make a separate “Replicate Consumable” Infusion, give the Artificer a few more Infusions per day, and bob’s your uncle.
    Actually I do agree, and I suggested it earlier. But my point was the infusion list can be expanded later, like the warlock invocation list was in Xanthar's Guide. It doesn't need to be perfected before the class is realised, or we will be old and grey first. And, following the example of warlocks, you could have subclass specific infusions. Replicate Potion for Alchemists, Replicate Scroll for Archivists.

    However, the ability to brew a potion of giant strength once per long rest isn't going to let the alchemist hold it's own in a fight - it will still want the homunculus.
    XP Tazawa gave XP for this post

  7. #37
    Member
    A 1e title so awesome it's not in the book (Lvl 21)



    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    2,431
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Farquhar View Post
    Actually I do agree, and I suggested it earlier. But my point was the infusion list can be expanded later, like the warlock invocation list was in Xanthar's Guide. It doesn't need to be perfected before the class is realised, or we will be old and grey first. And, following the example of warlocks, you could have subclass specific infusions. Replicate Potion for Alchemists, Replicate Scroll for Archivists.

    However, the ability to brew a potion of giant strength once per long rest isn't going to let the alchemist hold it's own in a fight - it will still want the homunculus.
    Oh, sure. I’m cool with the pets, personally (kind of. I don’t like the turret conceptually, and I think the artificial mind needs work). My problem is with the spellcasting. And I wouldn’t even mind if spellcasting was a feature of some Artificer subclass, I just don’t want all of them to be forced into it.
    XP Yaarel gave XP for this post

  8. #38
    Member
    The Great Druid (Lvl 17)



    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,744
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Farquhar View Post
    Actually I do agree, and I suggested it earlier. But my point was the infusion list can be expanded later, like the warlock invocation list was in Xanthar's Guide. It doesn't need to be perfected before the class is realised, or we will be old and grey first. And, following the example of warlocks, you could have subclass specific infusions. Replicate Potion for Alchemists, Replicate Scroll for Archivists.

    However, the ability to brew a potion of giant strength once per long rest isn't going to let the alchemist hold it's own in a fight - it will still want the homunculus.
    Why not go all the way: Remove the assorted pets from the base class and make a range of companions and companion abilities/upgrades available on the infusions list.
    XP Seramus gave XP for this post

  9. #39
    Member
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)



    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,592
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlaquin View Post
    Oh, sure. I’m cool with the pets, personally (kind of. I don’t like the turret conceptually, and I think the artificial mind needs work). My problem is with the spellcasting. And I wouldn’t even mind if spellcasting was a feature of some Artificer subclass, I just don’t want all of them to be forced into it.
    Personally, I rarely get into ‘pets’, but for certain Artificer archetypes it seems to work. The artificial mind feels like an appropriate concept but its implementation needs lots of work. The robot beast with a healing ray, I cant help but like for the tinkerer. However. The ‘turret’ is all kinds of wrong for a wand-maker archetype. The humunculus feels more like a cute familiar, and in the same way, works better as an optional spell for any players who want it. It has little to do with potions, per se, but can fit well enough for those who like it.

    I strongly dislike the half-caster Artificer. But your point that perhaps one of the subclass archetypes gets access to higher level spells, might satisfy me too. Maybe the wand-maker archetype gets the high tier spell levels of 6 to 9.



    [Edit]

    Note, for me, I want a full-caster Artificer, who infuses items with magic. I now read you want a non-spellcaster, I guess more like a Rogue with a ‘Use Magic Device’ skill. I wonder if a class is possible that can handle both a full-spellcaster archetype and a non-spellcaster archetype.
    Last edited by Yaarel; Sunday, 2nd June, 2019 at 05:44 PM.
    XP Charlaquin gave XP for this post

  10. #40
    Member
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)



    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    2,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Cap'n Kobold View Post
    Why not go all the way: Remove the assorted pets from the base class and make a range of companions and companion abilities/upgrades available on the infusions list.
    Balance. The infusions as they stand largely reproduce the effect of magic items the party might find anyway. So their actual effect of infusions on the artificers combat power is negligible*. However, the combat pets add significantly to the artificers combat power and do not reproduce the effect of something that could be found anyway. Ergo, artificers would be forced to take the pet infusion anyway or be gimped in combat. A choice between something powerful and something mediocre is not a choice at all.


    *Repeating Shot in conjunction with a pistol or musket gives the artificer a significant boost to combat power, but that is situational and build-specific enough to be excused.

Similar Threads

  1. New Unearthed Arcana: Revised Artificer
    By Gradine in forum *Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 118
    Last Post: Wednesday, 29th May, 2019, 03:05 AM
  2. UA Artificer survey?
    By i_dont_meta in forum *Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Tuesday, 2nd April, 2019, 12:04 AM
  3. Artificer Class, Revised: Rip Me A New One
    By Liane the Wayfarer in forum *Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: Wednesday, 4th November, 2015, 07:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •