But, the Artificer is a Martial, warrior Class, in all Subclasses. I see nothing to deny the Vishiness if the Artificer, except special pleading. Unlike a "Swordmage" or "Battlemage," at least the Artificer has a proper fictional identity.
Ooh, now I really gotta think of how exactly to describe a gish because just saying "It's not a gadgeteer" isn't a fair argument (though it is part of the argument). This is a good thing.
So mechanically in tune with the Paladin and Ranger in that it is:
A variably armored warrior with a d10 hit-die, fighting style, spellcasting up to level 5 that includes specialty spells, and class abilities that reinforce it's central theme.
Mechanically central theme of:
Channeling magic through your weapon, spells to buff or maneuver yourself around the battlefield.
Likely has weapon use as an arcane focus, extra attack at 5th level, an ability to sacrifice a spell slot to activate a central theme (I'm thinking turning on the arcane strike but that's a bit specific for this post), an 11th level that is akin to but not quite an extra attack.
Tentatively I think calling it Battlemage or Spellsword or something more in the line of generic would get the point across about what it is and what it does and then have the subclass determine it's 'Theme' like the Fighter, Rogue, Ranger, or Sorcerer. There seem to be enough variations that there is a thematic need for a gish but the variations don't have a throughline that lends the class as a whole a theme.
So, unhelpfully, I must say what it is clearly not trying for is a gadgeteer.
