D&D 5E Does the Artificer Suck?

[Warpiglet-7]

Your entire POV on artificers is…extremely odd, to me.

The class is built to “give away” their infusions, it absolutely doesn’t make themselves weaker.

The idea upthread that artificers don’t make good use of their bonus actions…is just incredible.

On a basic level if they did as much damage as an optimized fighter or Paladin wouldn’t it be bizarre?

they can do several things pretty well.

as to giving infusions away it certainly is an option but I would like to take a magic shield and weapon for myself and do some booming blades complimented by artillery—-with a bonus action!

A wand of secrets and double proficiency with thieves tools on this platform? Very useful. If someone is worried about spells, the ring of spell refueling and one of many feats puts that in check.

I toyed with going heavy armor and a mace with str (let the haters cry foul).

Reasonable combat, good utility. Lots of stuff to do. You can get a lot of play styles on a utility chassis. Heck, on a blasting/utility chassis.

it does not take the place of a Paladin. Why should it? I plan to go aggressive to make a melee artillerist. At this stage, does not look like a stooge to me.

the real problem is choosing the feats but if you want you can have fighter AC, cleric HP and some blasting potential.

if you could do all of that as well as a fighter wizard rogue of the same level I would seriously question the design decision. As it is, you can do a lot to a reasonable level.

 

[Neonchameleon]

the real problem is choosing the feats but if you want you can have fighter AC, cleric HP and some blasting potential.

You mean like a cleric?

 

[Fenris-77]

You mean like a cleric?

Shhh, they're having a moment.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

3/4 are designed for combat going by their class features.

If you give your infusions away you're making yourself weaker.

If you want to play support pick a better class.

No. It is fine.
No other class can give flight at level 2.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

You mean like a cleric?

If all versatile customizable classes are clerics, sure! Why not.

 

[Zardnaar]

No. It is fine.
No other class can give flight at level 2.

Yeah but then you're an alchemist. It's the D&D equivalent of wearing a kick me sign.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yeah but then you're an alchemist. It's the D&D equivalent of wearing a kick me sign.

Yeah, but try kicking someone flying 10ft above you...

 

[FrogReaver]

I have an artificer in my game I run. It's a Battle Smith currently level 6. I've seen it played since level 1.

Anyway it's not really impressing me. It's a half caster that's a bit meh at dealing damage compared with Paladins and Rangers.

It looks like it may get better latter around level 10 or so but that's to late imho.

And the other subclasses look worse than the battlesmith.

Rangers copped a lot if flak for sucking but this class seems worse.

Thoughts?

Are you comparing the artificer to GWM/SS other PC's buffing said characters? Or are you comparing the Artificer to a featless Fighter/Paladin?

 

[Zardnaar]

Are you comparing the artificer to GWM/SS other PC's buffing said characters? Or are you comparing the Artificer to a featless Fighter/Paladin?

Just overall. Artificer didn't do that much relative to other options.

Two powergamers looked over it and couldn't really do anything better except the Battlesmith gave some infusions away.

3 of them are sold as combat type classes but they're not that good at combat or support.

And the battlesmith is generally regarded as "the best" one.

Armorer is dependent on it's special weapons and artillerist on the turret so they don't benefit from a lot of feats other types can.

Clerics in my groups aren't competing with Rogues and similar for damage they're beating them.

 

[FrogReaver]

Just overall. Artificer didn't do that much relative to other options.

Two powergamers looked over it and couldn't really do anything better except the Battlesmith gave some infusions away.

3 of them are sold as combat type classes but they're not that good at combat or support.

And the battlesmith is generally regarded as "the best" one.

Armorer is dependent on it's special weapons and artillerist on the turret so they don't benefit from a lot of feats other types can.

Clerics in my groups aren't competing with Rogues and similar for damage they're beating them.

With no feats I've got the Battlesmith directly dealing 17.65 DPR (@ lvl6 vs 18AC) and causing about 4.125 DPR (via causing a handcrossbow to be magical in the fighters hands ).

That's a total DPR of 21.775.

The Hand Crossbow Fighter does about 25.275 (if no feat granted via race). That's only 16% higher than the Battlesmith that requires no feats.

Defensively the Battlesmith is better due to having the shield and absorb elements spells. Has much better utility and out of combat capabilities as well. Tactically can body block wider doorways (due to having the steel defender) and threaten with more OA's.