Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RealAlHazred" data-source="post: 6749954" data-attributes="member: 25818">Originally posted by Marandahir:Why don't you want to go the way of the 5e Bard with full-casting and limit the magic in other ways? It seems to me the "racing ahead of everyone else" happens regardless of the max-out level because of having access to everyone's spells. This is the fundamental problem, in my opinion. If you had a select Artificer list, like everyone else has for their classes, you could get 9th-level spells just fine. You could even have a Magical Secrets-like feature if you want more diversity, but here's the rub: Artificers have rarely, if ever, been about Illusion, Enchantment, or Divination. Sure, they'll make items related to these schools, but they really are more the mad scientists, tinkerers, spell blasters and supporters. Bard gets access mainly to healing conjurations/evocations, some supportive conjurations, abjurations, and necromancies akin to the Cleric, and then sound-based evocations (for the music stuff) and Illusion, Enchantment, and Divination spells akin to the Wizards of those schools. Artificers have a clear spell-list that goes in an almost exact opposite direction: healing conjurations/evocations, ome supportive conjurations, abjurations, and necromancies akin to the Cleric, and then Trasmutations, Abjurations, Conjurations, and Evocations akin to Wizarding schools. It wouldn't be that hard to develop a list of spells that are scream "Artificer."I think ultimately that the complications and weirdness of the class come from your desire to make the class the ultimate generalist caster, and yet, it seems odd. If Artificers can learn any spell because they could find scrolls of any spell and know how to read and translate those into magic, why can't the Wizard do the same? Why can't Wizards scribe cure light wounds into their spellbooks? The logic that the Artificer should be able to learn any spell suddenly makes the Wizard feel impotent, which, while some of us would love seeing them knocked down a peg, doesn't make sense from an in-world perspective. It makes a lot more sense to limit the Artificer's allowable spell-pool. And when you do that, you could then make it a full caster, since it wouldn't be overwhelmingly better than every other caster. The nigh-unlimited versatility was what killed the Generalist wizard, after all. There are other ways of making a class versatile. Also, the way you're doing it makes the Bard feel impotent, which is really odd. The Bard, the Wizard, and the Sorcerer all got versatility as their schtick this edition, but in completely different ways (Wizards can cast more often and with more reliable choices each day, Bards have astounding accesss to various spell lists through their dabbling with magical secrets, Sorcerers can convert spell slots into spell enhancers or spell enhancers into spell slots to negotiate around specific issues). This Artificer basically takes the Bard type of versatility and completely outshines the Bard in it, despite the Bard starting from 1st level with magic, and your Artificer only getting 7 levels of magic. The math might work in terms of not overpowering other classes, but what you've presented outshines both the Wizard and the Bard, a feat that for an arcane class that is almost incredible, especially when Artificers have always been the "working class" Arcane class – less sparkly but just as effective. This guy plays Rogue, Bard, Wizard, and while he doesn't do their jobs better than them, he does them in grander ways. That's a problem.</blockquote>

Verification