Are you satisfied enough with the Artificer to publish it?

[Charlaquin]

I think we're using the same term for two different things. There may be room for both, but I definitely don't think they should overlap.

I'm coming from the perspective of an Eberron GM. In that setting, the artificer is explicitly someone who treats magic as a craft/industry. They make golems, bind elementals to power airships, create magic swords, etc. It may not be your thing, but that's the itch I want scratched and "artificer" is the term WotC decided to use for that role in 3.5, so it carries that weight.

It sounds like you're wanting an actual engineer or crafty-scientist. Not something I really care about, but I don't have a problem with it existing. Let's use your term of "tinkerer", just to use a name that isn't already claimed.

Now, I really don't care much if WotC decides the term "artificer" would be better for the tinkerer. Just don't try to tie it to Eberron. Tell us what the new name for the Eberron artificer will be and move on. I do think that's a bit silly, considering there are more words that work for engineer/tinkerer than for the Eberron artificer, but not worth getting too bent out of shape about. What they shouldn't do is make one class that hit both buckets. Pick a lane and stay in it.

The easiest illustration of this is the firearms sidebar. For the Eberron concept of an artificer -- treating magic as technology -- there is absolutely no reason to correlate artifice to firearms. In fact, it's kinda silly, since the artificer would gravitate towards wands and similar items (in fact, the artillerist archetype doubles down on this). I could actually make a case that the sidebar should say, "even if firearms are present in your setting, the artificer does not begin play with proficiency in firearms." On the other hand, it would be absurd to restrict the tinkerer from firearms and there's a pretty strong case that the tinkerer should have firearm proficiency even if the campaign has limited access to firearms and no other class can use them.

There's a middle ground of steampunk, JRPGs, and the like where you would mix magic and technology. That's either a bad idea or a third lane. Unless that's specifically your thing, I get ketchup on my chocolate and you have peanut butter on your fries. Create another class for it? Maybe. If all three exist, I'm going to list the artificer as an approved class, allow the tinkerer if someone asks, and tell the steampunker to go away (in fairly rude terms).

Very good point.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I look at it like this: if you are going to go to the trouble to make a class where every subclass has a minion/pet, then the minion/pet ought to be a class feature instead of a subclass feature (the subclass feature is what kind of minion/pet you get), with the power budget to match it. In short, if you aren't going to make the minion/pet be to the artificer what eldritch blast is to the warlock, then don't bother.

I don't have strong feelings about whether the artificer should be the pet class or not.

Still no "conjure minor modrons" spell? That seems like a significant oversight.

 

[cbwjm]

I think the class looks fine. I'm thinking of playing one to try it out, but on the whole, I'm not too fond of every subclass having a pet. I can actually see me ignoring the artillerist turret.

Another thing that presents a problem is that what they do I tend to allow others to do anyway. Trained in alchemist supplies allows you to make minor alchemical items. Combine that with the arcane skill and you can start crafting potions. I guess the subclass could just be someone better at it though.

I allow casters to swap out cantrips anyway so I'd probably have to come up with some other ability for the artificer although maybe changing on short rest instead of a long rest is benefit enough.

I guess another issue I have is that I don't really play in eberron and artificers don't typically fit my worlds so they won't be an allowable class. On the other hand, they don't have to fit my worlds, they just need to work for eberron which I guess they do.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Probably not, but it's definitely getting there.

Some refinement on the subclasses as well as maybe a few more of them to open up some other ideas and use more tool proficients (I mentioned in the first thread on the revised artficer that having a Jeweler and a Periodic Table Elementalist would be neat ideas).

The way they set up the class is good in my opinion, it just, like I said, needs some additional refinement.

 

[BookBarbarian]

I was not much intertestedf before, but I do like the idea of a Int based half-caster that can create magic items.

I just did a breakdown for one of my players and came up with these thoughts:

Taking another look at the current Artificer, I think there's one major issue I have left, but it's a doozey. With the exception of having a "golem master" specialty, the artificer shouldn't have a pet.

The alchemist's homonculus is relatively inoffensive and there's some history in D&D of coupling alchemists and homonculi. I'm probably OK with this subclass as written. At the very least, it no longer makes me think of Pop Fizz from Skylanders, which was my problem with the previous draft.

The archivist is just weird. The artificial mind seems too much like some sort of magical Alexa. There are some aspects of the subclass that might make a great foundation for the "golem master" -- there's an obvious tie to creating the warforged. On the other hand, the accidental creation of the warforged could have prompted a new, young field among artificers. Also, the way House Sivis manipulates elemental spirits for the creation of things like airships and the lightning rail gives some justification to the powers. I'm still uncomfortable with how much the "computer" dominates the class, and would prefer to see it revamped. Though, it could be reskinned as more of a Mark of Scribing thing than an artificer, for a unique character.

The artillerist is actually almost fixed. They got rid of the big shoulder cannon, in favor of wands. The turrets are probably the worst of the pets, though. You take an action (6 seconds) to just "create" a man-sized automaton with crab legs and it either has a flamethrower, laser gun, or a healing beacon. You can also just "dismiss" it in 6 seconds. I think the easy fix is to say that you can carry around a staff or similar item (open to suggestions) that you can jam into the ground to do the same basic thing. I'm not sure how getting rid of the movement would balance out, though. Maybe the ability does need to be replaced with something else, less pet-like.

The battle smith is an interesting problem. The iron defender is a great kernel for golem master subclass and it'd be easy enough to say, "can be metallic or some other golem-like construction, but here are the stats". Tying it to armor working makes some sense, but not as much as I'd like -- plus, I'd like to so a "battle smith" that focused on arms and armor, separate from the construct. So, it's almost a perfect implementation for one of the archetypes, but the flavor around what the sub-class is supposed to do doesn't match.

Edit: Note that I'm no warmer to the steampunk flavor than I was before. A re-read just showed that they actually did tone it down a lot.

I'd also like to see the construct moved to one option, and I'd also like it to not be the one that's best at melee combat.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Um, it is published.

Or did you mean, put it in a book? What book?

(Less facetiously, if they release a sourcebook for a setting where the Artificer fits in, then by all means they should include it in that sourcebook.)

 

[gyor]

I love all the subclasses. Maybe the Alchemical Homoculus should become an Infusion instead of a class feature?

 

[ClaytonCross]

If they would take awesome "Spell-Storing Item" ability from the level 18 where no one will ever see it used and replace the lack luster "The Right Cantrip for the Job" at level 10 where "Spell-Storing Item" would be more a part of the class I would be happy. "The Right Cantrip for the Job" is very situational and almost voided by the ability to change cantrips at when you level as well as the Artillerist subclass ability "Wand Prototype" duplicating the ability to change a cantrip on long rest. If you can't do it on the spot when you need it, ultimately its just learning player preference which is already done with "When you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the artificer cantrips you know with another cantrip from the artificer spell list." … Then if you want to keep "The Right Cantrip for the Job" at level 18, just let it change one cantrip to one other artificer cantrip as an action once a day, so you can actually use it in those random chance situations instead of having picked the wrong spell during your last rest.

I would also like to see the additional subclasses though. We have an Alchemist (aka potions) and Artillerist (Wands) … I am really hoping for a Scribe (scrolls and symbols) … 3 is a dissent start. I mean robes, staffs, armor, and weapons would be considerations but If I could pick one scrolls is my #1 subclass add hope.

 

[Psyzhran2357]

If they would take awesome "Spell-Storing Item" ability from the level 18 where no one will ever see it used and replace the lack luster "The Right Cantrip for the Job" at level 10 where "Spell-Storing Item" would be more a part of the class I would be happy. "The Right Cantrip for the Job" is very situational and almost voided by the ability to change cantrips at when you level as well as the Artillerist subclass ability "Wand Prototype" duplicating the ability to change a cantrip on long rest. If you can't do it on the spot when you need it, ultimately its just learning player preference which is already done with "When you gain a level in this class, you can replace one of the artificer cantrips you know with another cantrip from the artificer spell list." … Then if you want to keep "The Right Cantrip for the Job" at level 18, just let it change one cantrip to one other artificer cantrip as an action once a day, so you can actually use it in those random chance situations instead of having picked the wrong spell during your last rest.

I would also like to see the additional subclasses though. We have an Alchemist (aka potions) and Artillerist (Wands) … I am really hoping for a Scribe (scrolls and symbols) … 3 is a dissent start. I mean robes, staffs, armor, and weapons would be considerations but If I could pick one scrolls is my #1 subclass add hope.

You can't change cantrips on level-up. You cna only change 1st level spells and above.

 

[Yaarel]

No. I don't know what happened along the process to make it a half caster pet class, but that's not what I want from it.

Yeah. I get that half-casters can be powerful, and it shores up the mundane aspects.

At the same time, someone who makes magic items needs to excel at magic, including high-level spellcasting for high-level magic items.

At the very least, I want to see a high level feature that can access high level spells, even if like the way a Warlock does.