Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 7605746" data-attributes="member: 5100">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.</blockquote>

Verification