D&D 5E Artificer should be a half caster (0-5)

[Xeviat]

There, I said it. They don't need any attack cantrips, but I think they should follow the half caster structure. We don't have an arcane half caster and it would give them the smidge more magic that I think they need.

I'd take out their mechanical servant and give that to a third subclass. If that hurts their damage dealing ability too much, I might buff their attacks a bit at fifth (maybe add half damage on a save to their alchemical or gun attacks).

It should be pretty easy to grab them a few cantrips and 5th level spells that fit their theme.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Xeviat]

I sat down and tried to do it real quick. The Artificer interestingly has 4 dead levels, where the Rogue/Arcane Trickster has none. The Paladin and Ranger have 3 dead levels, so that kind of leads me to thinking the Artificer should be a half caster. I'll post what I came up with soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Proxxy55]

Your convincing argument has swayed me.

Why should the Artificer be a half caster? You gave literally no reasons or arguments why they should be a half-caster. You

 

[Phazonfish]

This might only be tangentially relevant, but aren't half-casters 1-5 rather than 0-5? Personally I actually like third casters better because they tend to get okay cantrips and half-casters tend to have less utility than I'd like in their high level spell options.

 

[Talcoram Cyndar]

Except that the Artificer is a 1-4 caster. No cantrips

-TC

 

[Arnwolf666]

In my mind the wizard is an artificer and alchemist using material components and devices to manipulate magic with the rare few spells that are verbal only like hidden gems of secret words.

 

[77IM]

Agreed. I don't see how a person could have such a deep and understanding mastery of magic as to craft items without being at least a half-caster, if not a 2/3 caster or even a full caster.

I think a really interesting approach would be a per-encounter caster following the warlock progression. So an Int-based warlock with more wizardish spells. This feels like it would fit the flavor: artificer's spellcasting is quick-and-dirty, because they put most of their effort into magic items.

 

[Proxxy55]

Agreed. I don't see how a person could have such a deep and understanding mastery of magic as to craft items without being at least a half-caster, if not a 2/3 caster or even a full caster.

I think a really interesting approach would be a per-encounter caster following the warlock progression. So an Int-based warlock with more wizardish spells. This feels like it would fit the flavor: artificer's spellcasting is quick-and-dirty, because they put most of their effort into magic items.

But why, mechanically, should that be so? You need to have an actual reason why the artificer should be a half-caster. Not "because it feels like it should be." Especially because, thematically, it can work just fine.

For example, does an engineer know as much about string theory as a theoretical physicist? You don't necessarily need a "deep and understanding mastery" of a topic to apply it.

 

[Phazonfish]

Except that the Artificer is a 1-4 caster. No cantrips

-TC

Wow, is that so? That's really odd that Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters are more potent casters than Artificers.

 

[Ancalagon]

One of the sub-classes gets the mending cantrip, but yes in general they don't have cantrips.