Unearthed Arcana Revised Artificer Survey now available

Paul Farquhar · Jun 4, 2019

tglassy said:
I hear Pathfinder has so many options it’ll make your head spin. Have fun.

Actually, Pathfinder does a lot of refluffing spells. Pathfinder Alchemist refluffs spells as potions, and several Pathfinder classes refluff spells as psionics.

TwoSix · Jun 4, 2019

Charlaquin said:
I’d be fine with it working that way, personally, but I’ve been told that that isn’t sufficient spellcasting ability to express the Eberron Artificer. The suggestion of spell slots powering Infusions was meant as a compromise. An alternative where both full-spellcasting and non-spellcasting could coexist in the same class. Personally, I don’t much care how it gets done, as long as it is possible to play an Artificer who doesn’t cast spells and is still a fully contributing member of the party.

That's fair. I'd just rather hear about your personal vision than the compromise vision.

Charlaquin said:
Err... The Artificer in the playtest does get Extra Attack at 5th. Technically it’s slightly more restrictive than Extra Attack, but since you can Infuse a magic weapon for yourself if you need it and it counts as Extra Attack for multiclassing purposes, I’d call the current Artificer a martial by this definition.

Heh, shows how much concern I have about WotC's version. I only read through it once, since I'm already using the (to me) far more interesting KibblesTasty version.

Charlaquin said:
I don’t see any reason spellcasting via subclass needs to be 1/3 progression. Have the subclass kick in at 2nd level and give them half-casting via their subclasses. As long as there’s one that gets something else, like extra Infused Items, or a more powerful pet, or bonus ASIs like the Fighter and Rogue get. Anything, really, as long as there’s an avenue for playing a non-casting Artificer.

I suggested it only because there's no precedent for a class with no casting to gain half casting via subclass. Not that it can't work, but class structures that haven't been done before need a longer period of scrutiny. It also means the subclass would have more power relative to the base class, and thus any other subclasses would also need a power up. Again, not unworkable, but something to consider.

Charlaquin said:
Of course, I know it won’t happen. They didn’t give us an option for non-casting rangers, they’re not going to do it for Artificers. But as long as this thing is still in play testing, I’m going to keep giving the feedback that I and others want a non-spellcasting option for the class.

Probably not. It's personally not a big deal for me, since I have no issue reskinning one mechanical concept into multiple narrative expressions, or reskinning multiple mechanical concepts into the same narrative expression, if that supports that character concept and the player's needs. I just tend to advocate for new mechanical concepts, since those take work.

Mistwell · Jun 4, 2019

Charlaquin said:
I’d be fine with it working that way, personally, but I’ve been told that that isn’t sufficient spellcasting ability to express the Eberron Artificer. The suggestion of spell slots powering Infusions was meant as a compromise. An alternative where both full-spellcasting and non-spellcasting could coexist in the same class. Personally, I don’t much care how it gets done, as long as it is possible to play an Artificer who doesn’t cast spells and is still a fully contributing member of the party.

Err... The Artificer in the playtest does get Extra Attack at 5th. Technically it’s slightly more restrictive than Extra Attack, but since you can Infuse a magic weapon for yourself if you need it and it counts as Extra Attack for multiclassing purposes, I’d call the current Artificer a martial by this definition.

I don’t see any reason spellcasting via subclass needs to be 1/3 progression. Have the subclass kick in at 2nd level and give them half-casting via their subclasses. As long as there’s one that gets something else, like extra Infused Items, or a more powerful pet, or bonus ASIs like the Fighter and Rogue get. Anything, really, as long as there’s an avenue for playing a non-casting Artificer.

Of course, I know it won’t happen. They didn’t give us an option for non-casting rangers, they’re not going to do it for Artificers. But as long as this thing is still in play testing, I’m going to keep giving the feedback that I and others want a non-spellcasting option for the class.

Weird. The quote has my name. But I didn't write what you're responding to? Maybe it was [MENTION=205]TwoSix[/MENTION] ?

TwoSix · Jun 4, 2019

Mistwell said:
Weird. The quote has my name. But I didn't write what you're responding to? Maybe it was [MENTION=205]TwoSix[/MENTION] ?

Yea, that was my quote listed under your name. I'm sure [MENTION=6779196]Charlaquin[/MENTION] can fix it in the morning (since it's midnight in Australia.)

Savevsdeath · Jun 4, 2019

Charlaquin said:
And others, like myself, are perfectly fine with the Eberron Artificer, but want the 5e Artificer to be able to accommodate a wider range of character concepts than the original.

3.5 had a zillion classes and prestige classes to represent highly specific concepts. 5e takes a much broader, more archetypal approach to class design, with the more specific concepts falling to Subclasses to express. A 5e Artificer needs to be able to encompass more than just the Eberron Artificer, because it’s going to be the class everyone who wants to play a magitech character has to use, regardless of whether they’re playing Eberron or not. What I want may not be the Eberron Artificer, but there’s not going to be a class built around what I want out of a Magitech character. So, I want the 5e Artificer to be built broadly enough to use for both what I want and the Eberron Artificer.

What do you want the Artificer to do that it can't currently? What concept should it represent that you believe is unrepresented? I'm struggling to think of any.

Charlaquin said:
Yes, that is precisely what I want them to do. Rather than casting spells themselves, they craft items, which they use to cast spells they otherwise couldn’t.

That's fine; while this would make them more like the Artificers of old, it would also make them less suitable for many settings and more complicated to redesign. I wouldn't be heartbroken to get an artificer that lost spells entirely and focused more on Infusions, but how do you design that so it's meaningfuly different from a spellcaster? The class already makes it clear that you are casting via items; that's really all the mechanics that are needed. What do you want done differently? What is your complaint or brilliant change that would be better and make the class work for any setting?

Edit: I started writing the post last night and you answered part of my question since. I see where you're trying to go; i just don't like where you're headed, but who says everyone has to agree? But ultimately, i want the class to serve Eberron first and everything else second; an Artificer that doesn't feel right for Eberron but is great for other settings is a bad Artificer IMO, and i believe that baking more of the class' power into the subclass would cause a level of overspecialization that would make it not feel like an Artificer.

Charlaquin · Jun 4, 2019

TwoSix said:
Yea, that was my quote listed under your name. I'm sure [MENTION=6779196]Charlaquin[/MENTION] can fix it in the morning (since it's midnight in Australia.)

I live in the US, so it’s morning now where I’m at. Sorry, I copy and paste quote tags a lot, sometimes I get the wrong one. It’s fixed now.

TwoSix · Jun 4, 2019

Charlaquin said:
I live in the US, so it’s morning now where I’m at. Sorry, I copy and paste quote tags a lot, sometimes I get the wrong one. It’s fixed now.

Apologies, I took your location field to mean something else.

Charlaquin · Jun 4, 2019

TwoSix said:
Apologies, I took your location field to mean something else.

Yeah, Oz as in the magical land of. I have no idea why ENworld lists that as my location though. I once set that as my location for Gaia Online as a joke when I was in middle school, but I never set it to that in ENworld that I remember.

Seramus · Jun 4, 2019

The survey is no longer accepting additional responses?
But we only got one week of play testing the new material!

MiraMels · Jun 4, 2019

Seramus said:
The survey is no longer accepting additional responses?
But we only got one week of play testing the new material!

That hardcover is coming out at the end of the year, they've got to hop to it!

I hope we see another UA release before the book is published.

Unearthed Arcana Revised Artificer Survey now available

Paul Farquhar

Legend

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Savevsdeath

First Post

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)

Seramus

Hero

MiraMels

Explorer

Similar Threads