Artificer UA to be released in February

I don't think there is a bunker strong enough to endure the fanbase exploding over this.

 

[NaturalZero]

But why would you want to use magical fire/electricity to propel a lead ball down an adamantine tube when with the same magic and fewer materials you could simply shoot the fire/lightning directly at the target?! It's adding over-complication to achieve a less effective outcome (since in D&D non-magical bludgeoning damage is less effective than fire/lightning damage).

Why would you assume that a magical spark or miniscule explosion would require the same magical energy/power as casting lighting bolt or fireball? It would logically be less than a cantrip. It's a weak Shocking Grasp or Firebolt.

As doctorbadwolf says, from a world-building perspective there's nothing saying that creating a tiny explosion in a tube takes more resources than a wand that shoots an entire Firebolt (or whatever), especially if we're making a legitimately magical Eberron thing instead of a real-world mechanism. From this perspective, now I'm seeing how the magical "thunder cannon" could literally just be a single piece without moving parts and a tiny, less-powerful-than-a-cantrip spell in the barrel that propels metal balls. You could conceptually make it for less than the cost of a wand with a simpler design than even the most primitive real-world firearm.

Why would they make something that does bludgeoning damage in a war with magic? Because the thunder cannon does a bunch of other things, via the artificer. A wand does exactly one thing, but Unearthed Arcana gave us an experimental TC that does thunder damage, lightning damage, AOEs, et al. This is without getting into the idea that bullets could be enchanted with special properties, including rare ones with big effects. The wand does magic missle 6 times a day and that's it, but the magical gun is a platform to throw out Tanglefoot bullets, siege-destroying acid rounds, undead-killing blessed rounds, dispel magic rounds, or even expensive one-shot Fireball rounds. I'm thinking of how the Eberron-gun could be a thing that basically shoots bullets that are essentially one-charge spell expendable items, and that seems to not only fit the theme of the world perfectly but open up plenty of design space and options. It's steeped in magic flavor and far more versatile than a regular ol' wand.

This might be of interest to some: http://keith-baker.com/firearms-in-eberron/

One of the cool pieces of 4e that 5e threw out was the concept of implements with different properties and benefits from specialization. I'd be hyped for an in-depth rule module that gave different implements various properties and presented a slew of intrinsically magical implements that grant effects to spells cast. I feel like i'd be more excited for wandslingers completely eclipsing the gunsmith artificer if there were interesting options to make wandslingers different from every other mage in every DnD setting that uses cantrips at-will. What would a specialized wandslinger artificer bring to the table that a every warlock with a gun-shaped wand from any other world doesn't?

 

[vecna00]

Just a small heads up: At the beginning of today's D&D News, Greg Tito said the UA is dropping this week. More than likely not today, but either Wednesday, Thursday, or (GASP!) Friday.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

It was posted to Twitter tonight that we get the new issue of Dragon+ Wednesday afternoon, so we should get the Artificer UA at the same time, since it will probably be the UA that is in the new issue.

 

[vecna00]

It was posted to Twitter tonight that we get the new issue of Dragon+ Wednesday afternoon, so we should get the Artificer UA at the same time, since it will probably be the UA that is in the new issue.

I don't think it'll be a part of Dragon+ with the way Tito was talking about the two. In regards to Dragon+, he said that it was pretty much ready to upload during the recording of D&D News, while the UA was not quite done.

Plus, I'm pretty sure they would flat-out say if the UA was going to release in Dragon+ instead of just being talked about within its pages. They could be released side-by-side though!

 

[Parmandur]

I don't think it'll be a part of Dragon+ with the way Tito was talking about the two. In regards to Dragon+, he said that it was pretty much ready to upload during the recording of D&D News, while the UA was not quite done.

Plus, I'm pretty sure they would flat-out say if the UA was going to release in Dragon+ instead of just being talked about within its pages. They could be released side-by-side though!

Getting the first new Class widely sampled is important nto WotC: could be that tying it into the Dragon+ issue for exposure alongside the Ghosts of Saltmarsh announcement was part of the delay.

 

[Jester David]

Getting the first new Class widely sampled is important nto WotC: could be that tying it into the Dragon+ issue for exposure alongside the Ghosts of Saltmarsh announcement was part of the delay.

Except this won’t be the first new class. We’ve seen another earlier artificer and the mystic already.

 

[SkidAce]

I've been ignoring Dragon +.

Wonder if I should re-assess.

 

[jayoungr]

I've been ignoring Dragon +.

Wonder if I should re-assess.

I quite enjoy it, and almost every issue has a freebie of some kind (adventures, digital maps, etc.).

 

[Ancalagon]

I just hope that they remove the robot companion at level 6. It didn't scale well, and should be a subclass specific power (the "golemist"?)

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I just hope that they remove the robot companion at level 6. It didn't scale well, and should be a subclass specific power (the "golemist"?)

Based on the other pet subclasses, it will probably be the homonculist.