Zardnaar
Legend
I would love to see more wizards played.
Just keep seeing more Bards/Sorcerers/Warlocks.
D&D 5E Does the Artificer Suck?
I would love to see more wizards played.
Just keep seeing more Bards/Sorcerers/Warlocks.
Levistus's_Leviathan
5e Freelancer
Heh. I have the exact opposite problem. In every active campaign of mine (except for my Icewind Dale one), we have a Wizard. One has a War Wizard, another has a Diviner, another has an Evoker, another has a Transmuter. We've only ever had 1 Sorcerer character, and that campaign died after about a handful of sessions. We've never had a Warlock (well, I've never DMed for a warlock. My only active character is a Hexblade Warlock), and only ever had 1 bard.
After 5th level I very rarely run out of slots to cast shield in an adventuring day. You are right though, if you are throwing fireballs and magic missiles every battle you will run out. While she can do that, it is not her role, let another caster use their slots to throw those things every fight.
IME Shadowblade and Haste should rarely be cast by a single-class bladesinger. Usually they are in the spellbook but not often used, and at higher levels Shadowblade is not usually prepared. Haste, when used, is usually cast on someone else. Not saying you can't play a bladesinger like that but for a single class bladesinger it is not the most effective way based on what we have seen at my table. For a multi-class bladesinger/AT or bladesinger/EK or even a bladesinger/Ranger shadowblade it is a different story. For those SB is awesome, but they are more strikers and in the case of the AT, typically kiting.
Blur and Protection from evil and good are both the most common spells cast as an action and the most common concentrations. If you are out of lower level slots an upcast of one of these is generally better than haste if you are casting it on yourself. PEG in particular is fabulous if you are fighting an undead/fey/fiend. This is one of the best defensive spells in the game giving not only disadvantage but also making you immune to charm and frightened and lasting for up to 10 minutes.
Hypnotic pattern is not usually prepared at my table by me or other bladesingers. Fear is the go-to control offensive spell at 3rd level and on a bladesinger is much better than HyPat. It is better because enemies can't shake each other out of it and they can take damage and still be under the effect. They do get a save if they move out of sight, but since they are dashing, that is several lost turns between moving away, making their save and then moving back (assuming they can move away). For most wizards fear is more difficult to cast because it is a cone, but this is not a problem for a bladesinger. Fear is used Fireball is sometimes used (if we have it in the book) when enemies are positioned to make it effective. Neither of these are cast as much as the other spells above though.
By the time you have the bladesinger subclass, sleep is already losing effectiveness and I don't think I have ever had color spray in the book. Absorb Elements is necessary to have prepared but it is not cast a whole lot, so it is not really a huge cost to cast. Every Shield is one less PEG and on a really long and bad day it can even be one less fireball, but on the other hand, even on those days you will usually still be laying down to rest with full or near full hit points.
Last edited:
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
@ECMO3 btw, I have been a bit more aggro in this discussion than needed. Sorry about that. To be clear, the fact that we play the game so differently that our POV on several classes is outright flipped is a good thing. 5e handles a lot of play styles really well without changing any rules, and we can see that in just how different folks’ experiences with the game are.
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
Not surprisingly, the first was also Warforged. When the second proved nearly as unbalanced, we removed the Artificer class, too.
In my 5E mod, there is no sign of either. ;-)
Levistus's_Leviathan
5e Freelancer
Yeah, I'm not seeing it. I have a Warforged Artificer in my campaign, and they're definitely not any more powerful or game-breaking than any of the other party members, and none of them are hyper-maximized or anything, either.
The most notable mechanics for the Warforged are its static +1 to AC, which is roughly equivalent to the Defense Fighting Style. That's just a passive 5% less chance of being hit by an attack roll, which isn't a game-changer, and comes at the expense of having to take a full hour to don or doff any armor that you want to wear (sure, no one else can take off your armor, but this is such a small "buff" that will almost never come up, that it might as well be ignored for most campaigns). Overall, this is a buff is good, but it has drawbacks, and isn't game-breakingly amazing. Everyone likes it, which is exactly what racial features should do.
Next, Constructed Resilience (and the feature attached to it, Sentry's Rest). First, poison resistance, which Dwarves also get. Second, the lack to eat, drink, or breathe. This is good, but very situational, and won't come up in basically any campaigns that don't track rations or waterskins (which are a lot). Again, not gamebreaking, even in a gritty-survival campaign, it's just a good benefit. Third, immunity to disease. This is also just a minor buff that will almost never come up. And if it does (like in a plague-campaign), it could be built into the story (like the Warforged PC sees all of his friends and fellow PCs waste and die from disease). Finally, the immunity to sleep and non-unconscious long rest. This is basically Trance (with a tiny, negligible part of Fey Ancestry).
Then, there's a bit of tool, language, and skills proficiencies (which are pretty standard pre-Tasha's, and also aren't game-breaking).
I mean, absolutely none of this is game-breaking, expect potentially in some very niche, very uncommon campaigns (like a plague campaign, or a gritty-survival campaign, or in one where sleeping is essential to the plot, somehow). Even the good, less-situational mechanical buffs aren't OP. Dwarves get poison resistance from Dwarven Resilience, Grung and Yuan-Ti both get full-on Poison Immunity at level 1 (Yuan-Ti are definitely OP, I'm just showing that there's a precedent for abilities on par with - or more powerful than - Constructed Resilience). A static +1 to AC is great, but nothing amazing (it's basically the exact same as the AC boost that Simic Hybrids can choose at level 5). Most of the racial Natural Armor features are better than a Warforged's Integrated Protection feature, like the Lizardfolk's Natural Armor or, better yet, the Loxodon's Natural Armor that scales with your CON score.
None of this is OP. In the vast majority of campaigns, Warforged will be absolutely fine and not game-breaking in the slightest.
Next, Artificers. I've seen a few people claim that the Artificer is underpowered (this thread is a great example), but I've seen even fewer people claim that it's OP/gamebreaking/"a munchkin's dream". Frankly, I think both of these claims are pretty ridiculous, and I tend to give more weight to the ones complaining that it's underpowered (the Alchemist subclass does exist, after all). I mean, they literally have the same armor proficiencies as a Ranger, but less weapon proficiencies, a smaller hit die, and have to trade their Fighting Style, their Extra Attack, and other martial features for 2 cantrips and a handful of infusions. They're half-casters, and they get a tiny bit more casting than Rangers/Paladins (this difference is even slighter if the Ranger/Paladin takes the Divine/Druidic Warrior Fighting Style), but aren't martial, they're primarily buff-based (and they can buff themselves if they choose to).
The primary complaint that I've heard about Artificers being OP was one guy ranting about how they can "create rare magic items at level 2!" (which isn't true, they can only create 1 rare magic item equivalent at level 2, which is a bit of +1 Armor that won't break any game), and besides that, I haven't heard any valid or reasonable complaint about them being OP. IMO, they're much less OP than a Paladin, and roughly equivalent to new Rangers in their power-scale. They do get nice features, and are versatile (much like the Warlock), but none of their subclasses are OP, none of their features are OP, and none of their spells are OP (they don't even get unique spells, they're mostly piggy-backing off of the Wizard and a bit from the Cleric).
In my experience, Paladins, Wizards, Clerics, Bards, and even Rogues have been more game-breaking than Artificers. And, in my experience, Aasimar, Elves, Mountain Dwarves, Yuan-Ti, Satyrs, and Dragonmarked Races have been much more powerful than Warforged. I just don't see how Warforged Artificers could be gamebreaking, unless in a very niche campaign, especially not gamebreaking enough for you to advocate/support removing them from the game.
Care to explain/rebutt anything?
UngeheuerLich
Legend
@AcererakTriple6
While I do agree with you, I try to do the rebuttal:
A warforged artificer, lets say a battlesmith, at level 6 could have 16 int, 16 con, 15 Str with pointbuy close to standard array and heavy armor proficiency taken at level 4.
Assuming plate and shield they can have AC 23 and the shield spell available on a regular basis. (No discussion about juggling because your shield in hand is the focus you need to cast spells as an artificer) I have played with an eldritch knight with that high armor, and this feels very unbalanced at first glance. They will literally only get hit by crits in typical actual adventuring days. If they fight next to the defender, attacks are made with disadvantage, so crits are also very rare.
Now the question is: do you consider 3 attacks on top per round overpowered or not.
I would say no:
Full spellcasters have 3rd level spells at that time, dedicated melee classes hit a lot harder. Instead of flashy spells, a bard has inspiration on a short rest base and so on...
While I do agree with you, I try to do the rebuttal:
A warforged artificer, lets say a battlesmith, at level 6 could have 16 int, 16 con, 15 Str with pointbuy close to standard array and heavy armor proficiency taken at level 4.
Assuming plate and shield they can have AC 23 and the shield spell available on a regular basis. (No discussion about juggling because your shield in hand is the focus you need to cast spells as an artificer) I have played with an eldritch knight with that high armor, and this feels very unbalanced at first glance. They will literally only get hit by crits in typical actual adventuring days. If they fight next to the defender, attacks are made with disadvantage, so crits are also very rare.
Now the question is: do you consider 3 attacks on top per round overpowered or not.
I would say no:
Full spellcasters have 3rd level spells at that time, dedicated melee classes hit a lot harder. Instead of flashy spells, a bard has inspiration on a short rest base and so on...
Last edited:
Levistus's_Leviathan
5e Freelancer
I mean, to add onto what you said, you can still be damaged even if you have a ridiculously high AC. Saving Throws against damage (especially ones that still damage on a successful save, like Breath Weapons or Fireballs) are a great way to go around AC if it's really messing up your game (don't do it too often, let the player that worked to get the great AC reap the benefits of the great AC, but do make sure that they're still being challenged). There's also fall damage, environmental hazards (like lava/molten metal, acid, etc), and plenty of other ways to damage (or otherwise challenge) PCs that have super-high ACs.
And that's hardly the only combo in the game that can get a really high AC. A Warforged Fighter could get around the same AC with the Defense fighting style (20 from Plate Armor, 22 from a Shield, 27 with the Shield spell). Bladesingers could get even higher with enough DEX and INT (especially when stacked with Haste).
And those are all very-specific race-class-subclass combos. Sure, they have the capability of getting really high AC if they want to go all-in on it. Does that make the whole class OP? Of course not.
Last edited:
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Non AC attacks are a bit rarer than AC attacks in many games. So depending on that, the high AC can be more or less intimidating.
I do consider it a feature of a character that wants tank written on their forehead.
I also note that the wisdom saving throw for my specific build is +1 at most... so it might not be uncommon that they might freeze of fear when fighting dragons, run if the level 1 cleric tells them to, or might even think it is a good Idea to fight phantasms or even their own party members...
DND_Reborn
The High Aldwin
No, not really.
If it isn't your experience, that is fine, but it is mine (and others...), so.... shrug
Similar Threads
