Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Artificer UA to be released in February
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 7772788" data-attributes="member: 5100"><p>Speaking only for myself (which seems appropriate), I think there are two major, but related, objections I have.</p><p></p><p>1) I don't like guns in D&D (in its role as default fantasy RPG), as a rule. There was a thread on this, not too long ago, where I conceded that I could imagine where someone could conceive of settings that would mix guns into fantasy in a way that worked (urban fantasy, obviously, and things like Deadlands or Shadowrun). So far, no one has done it in D&D, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done. From this perspective, I'm unlikely to ever be a fan of <u>any</u> class, regardless of name, that pretty much boils down to a gunslinger, assault gunner, or anything of the sort -- especially if it's positioned as being "vanilla" D&D. Straight up, IMO, "vanilla" D&D/fantasy, by definition, excludes guns or anything that fills that niche for most purposes. If you want a "gunslinger" class on DMs Guild, great. Ditto for something setting-specific. Not so much for a class presented as universal.</p><p></p><p>2) I do like Eberron. If Eberron is viewed through a lens of being steampunk or some such, that seems totally out of sync with #1. But, Eberron really isn't that setting. It's not just stripping the gears off tech and replacing them with glowing crystals. When taken to its logical conclusion (magic evolved instead of tech), there will be some overlap -- of course there will. But... Saying that a "gunner" subclass is totally in line with the themes of Eberron, is off the mark and runs the risk of revising the feel of the setting, especially since the Artificer class has been so iconic of Eberron since the setting was released. Does it make sense that there's probably some Cannith fanatic, somewhere, who carries around a staff with a 6 inch barrel? Yeah, probably. Does it make sense that it's one of the core builds for the class? Not so much.</p><p></p><p>To move from the "complaining" side to the the "offering solutions" side of the conversation, here's what I'd like to see:</p><p></p><p>Hang the Artificer on the Warlock chassis (with Int as casting ability). Instead of the Incantations mechanic, grant them a list of Infusions. This is in line with the idea that the Artificer isn't about raw spell-casting power, but is about taking magic and making it more available and applicable. It has the added benefit or reusing the Warlock skeleton to make it less of a one-off oddity. Break down the sub-classes as follows (names may need work). Note that I've not put this together, formally, so I'm not trying to balance, just give thematic builds.</p><p></p><p>* Alchemist -- Potion master, including oils, salves, and even scrolls. Focus on effects that are traditionally transitive, instant, or affect individuals, but that could also be used with some preparation. Ideas are things like an infusion that lets the alchemist spend a spell slot of a given level to create a specific potion (or one of a tight group) in exchange for a spell slot. The potion only lasts until the next short rest, but the alchemist could opt to renew it. Depending on balance and play-testing, I could see just allowing the alchemist to create a certain number of potions every day that would last all day (or multiple days), but I haven't fleshed this out enough to say what the balance point is.</p><p></p><p>* Maker (hate this name, but don't have a better one) -- Focus on creating what would generally be seen as "permanent" items -- swords, armor, wondrous items, etc. Infusions would have a lot to do with creating or transferring effects along those lines. For example, expend a 1st level spell slot to make a weapon, shield, or suit of armor have a +1 bonus until you take a short rest (can be renewed at that time, 3rd level slot makes +2, 5th level slot is +3). Other infusions could add elemental effects or resistances to items. Flavor is that this is the "adventuring" version of the maker, so they might be capable of doing full item creation, but the powers in play represent "good enough" enchantments that get the job done without huge time investments and remain somewhat flexible. If the source book included more formal item creation rules, I could see these guys also getting a break on time or money, or some other break. Probably better armor and weapon proficiency, too.</p><p></p><p>* Animator -- Focus on golems, clockwork creatures, and the like. This is the pet master. Pick a type of appropriate pet and get infusions that enhance it and/or your bond with it (shared casting, for example). I'm not a huge fan of pets, but it's definitely a niche that makes a lot of sense for the artificer.</p><p></p><p>* Channeller -- Master of rods, staves, wands, etc. This would be the closest to a "gunner" that I'd include. They'd get infusions that would let them maximize or modify the effects of magical devices. In some cases, this would be a lot like Sorcerer metamagic -- increased damage, better range, twinning. I could also see infusions that allowed them to just embed a spell in a stick of wood to use their other infusions on it or use spell slots to recharge a device. Some of the gunner abilities could probably be saved, but the flavor would need to be fixed.</p><p></p><p>Obviously, some of this overlaps with the previous UA version of the Artificer. I think a lot of it was just flavor. The potion master subclass just felt too much like the Skylander character who ran around throwing random crap. The Thunder Cannon was too science-y, even if not unbalanced or could be reskinned as a staff. I didn't like granting a pet to every Artificer, even though I agree it's a valid archetype it's not inherent to the larger concept. I also didn't like that the base class used the 1/3 spell progression that is otherwise reserved for sub-classes. Base classes should be either full (Wizard) or half (Paladin) casters. Warlock isn't really one of those, but it has its own internal consistency and it would also make sense that the Artificer would have a hard time multi-classing with standard casters.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercule, post: 7772788, member: 5100"] Speaking only for myself (which seems appropriate), I think there are two major, but related, objections I have. 1) I don't like guns in D&D (in its role as default fantasy RPG), as a rule. There was a thread on this, not too long ago, where I conceded that I could imagine where someone could conceive of settings that would mix guns into fantasy in a way that worked (urban fantasy, obviously, and things like Deadlands or Shadowrun). So far, no one has done it in D&D, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done. From this perspective, I'm unlikely to ever be a fan of [U]any[/U] class, regardless of name, that pretty much boils down to a gunslinger, assault gunner, or anything of the sort -- especially if it's positioned as being "vanilla" D&D. Straight up, IMO, "vanilla" D&D/fantasy, by definition, excludes guns or anything that fills that niche for most purposes. If you want a "gunslinger" class on DMs Guild, great. Ditto for something setting-specific. Not so much for a class presented as universal. 2) I do like Eberron. If Eberron is viewed through a lens of being steampunk or some such, that seems totally out of sync with #1. But, Eberron really isn't that setting. It's not just stripping the gears off tech and replacing them with glowing crystals. When taken to its logical conclusion (magic evolved instead of tech), there will be some overlap -- of course there will. But... Saying that a "gunner" subclass is totally in line with the themes of Eberron, is off the mark and runs the risk of revising the feel of the setting, especially since the Artificer class has been so iconic of Eberron since the setting was released. Does it make sense that there's probably some Cannith fanatic, somewhere, who carries around a staff with a 6 inch barrel? Yeah, probably. Does it make sense that it's one of the core builds for the class? Not so much. To move from the "complaining" side to the the "offering solutions" side of the conversation, here's what I'd like to see: Hang the Artificer on the Warlock chassis (with Int as casting ability). Instead of the Incantations mechanic, grant them a list of Infusions. This is in line with the idea that the Artificer isn't about raw spell-casting power, but is about taking magic and making it more available and applicable. It has the added benefit or reusing the Warlock skeleton to make it less of a one-off oddity. Break down the sub-classes as follows (names may need work). Note that I've not put this together, formally, so I'm not trying to balance, just give thematic builds. * Alchemist -- Potion master, including oils, salves, and even scrolls. Focus on effects that are traditionally transitive, instant, or affect individuals, but that could also be used with some preparation. Ideas are things like an infusion that lets the alchemist spend a spell slot of a given level to create a specific potion (or one of a tight group) in exchange for a spell slot. The potion only lasts until the next short rest, but the alchemist could opt to renew it. Depending on balance and play-testing, I could see just allowing the alchemist to create a certain number of potions every day that would last all day (or multiple days), but I haven't fleshed this out enough to say what the balance point is. * Maker (hate this name, but don't have a better one) -- Focus on creating what would generally be seen as "permanent" items -- swords, armor, wondrous items, etc. Infusions would have a lot to do with creating or transferring effects along those lines. For example, expend a 1st level spell slot to make a weapon, shield, or suit of armor have a +1 bonus until you take a short rest (can be renewed at that time, 3rd level slot makes +2, 5th level slot is +3). Other infusions could add elemental effects or resistances to items. Flavor is that this is the "adventuring" version of the maker, so they might be capable of doing full item creation, but the powers in play represent "good enough" enchantments that get the job done without huge time investments and remain somewhat flexible. If the source book included more formal item creation rules, I could see these guys also getting a break on time or money, or some other break. Probably better armor and weapon proficiency, too. * Animator -- Focus on golems, clockwork creatures, and the like. This is the pet master. Pick a type of appropriate pet and get infusions that enhance it and/or your bond with it (shared casting, for example). I'm not a huge fan of pets, but it's definitely a niche that makes a lot of sense for the artificer. * Channeller -- Master of rods, staves, wands, etc. This would be the closest to a "gunner" that I'd include. They'd get infusions that would let them maximize or modify the effects of magical devices. In some cases, this would be a lot like Sorcerer metamagic -- increased damage, better range, twinning. I could also see infusions that allowed them to just embed a spell in a stick of wood to use their other infusions on it or use spell slots to recharge a device. Some of the gunner abilities could probably be saved, but the flavor would need to be fixed. Obviously, some of this overlaps with the previous UA version of the Artificer. I think a lot of it was just flavor. The potion master subclass just felt too much like the Skylander character who ran around throwing random crap. The Thunder Cannon was too science-y, even if not unbalanced or could be reskinned as a staff. I didn't like granting a pet to every Artificer, even though I agree it's a valid archetype it's not inherent to the larger concept. I also didn't like that the base class used the 1/3 spell progression that is otherwise reserved for sub-classes. Base classes should be either full (Wizard) or half (Paladin) casters. Warlock isn't really one of those, but it has its own internal consistency and it would also make sense that the Artificer would have a hard time multi-classing with standard casters. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Artificer UA to be released in February
Top