Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 7576690" data-attributes="member: 7635">I'm going to disagree with you partially. You CAN build around AA to maximize damage just like you can build around Valor Bards or Bladelocks to maximize combat damage. However, I think its pretty safe to say that such builds should not be the default assumption of the artificer. For example, your build requires the use of a feat (which is, by definition, an optional rule even if few DMs don't allow it), and the base game should assume you don't need feats to make a class feature usable. The base artificer build seems to be geared toward a more support/magic role, much like how the base bard wants to be a support caster and the base warlock wants to be a ranged/caster class first. My thought here is that AA should be the 6th level feature of an artificer subclass focused on magical arms/armor and combat. Much like bladelocks and valor bards, the option should be there if you want to build around it, but by making it the generic 5th level ability (which is supposed to reward you with important features like extra attack, 3rd level spells, uncanny dodge or font of inspiration) it it too situational and requires too much forethought to set up properly. Unless you think to build ahead (select EW infusion, take crossbow mastery at 4th level, or have a decent str and somehow acquire proficiency in a martial weapon) you can easily have a 5th level class feature you cannot use, which doesn't seem to be how 5e class features work.&nbsp; TL;dr There should be a subclass, ala the valor bard, where AA is a thing for those who want combat first, caster second artificers. Its too fiddly and requires too much planning to make it useful the level you get it as written right now. The base artificer should get something else and leave AA to a sublcass.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 7576690, member: 7635"] I'm going to disagree with you partially. You CAN build around AA to maximize damage just like you can build around Valor Bards or Bladelocks to maximize combat damage. However, I think its pretty safe to say that such builds should not be the default assumption of the artificer. For example, your build requires the use of a feat (which is, by definition, an optional rule even if few DMs don't allow it), and the base game should assume you don't need feats to make a class feature usable. The base artificer build seems to be geared toward a more support/magic role, much like how the base bard wants to be a support caster and the base warlock wants to be a ranged/caster class first. My thought here is that AA should be the 6th level feature of an artificer subclass focused on magical arms/armor and combat. Much like bladelocks and valor bards, the option should be there if you want to build around it, but by making it the generic 5th level ability (which is supposed to reward you with important features like extra attack, 3rd level spells, uncanny dodge or font of inspiration) it it too situational and requires too much forethought to set up properly. Unless you think to build ahead (select EW infusion, take crossbow mastery at 4th level, or have a decent str and somehow acquire proficiency in a martial weapon) you can easily have a 5th level class feature you cannot use, which doesn't seem to be how 5e class features work. TL;dr There should be a subclass, ala the valor bard, where AA is a thing for those who want combat first, caster second artificers. Its too fiddly and requires too much planning to make it useful the level you get it as written right now. The base artificer should get something else and leave AA to a sublcass. [/QUOTE]

Verification