Level Up (A5E) Artificers and the Delicate Crafts

[xiphumor]

I want to preface this by saying that I think Andrew Engelbrite did a fantastic job designing A5e’s Artificer. Fizzle dice in particular are a statistical stroke of brilliance, and the schematics mechanic is an elegant way to expand on where the O5e Artificer felt limited.

However, as I’ve been mulling over the class which is intended to be A5e’s master craftsman, I can’t help but think that a few of the features - specifically Tactical Chemistry, Battlefield Smithing, and Magical Automaton - incline themselves more toward heavier, dirtier, mechanical trades. (The existing archetypes in A5e and O5e also share this bias, but as an intrinsically modular part of the class, they aren’t an issue in of themselves.)

Perhaps this bias is just how the Artificer ought to be, but as I glance down the list of tools in the AG and think about what it would mean for an Artificer to represent a seamstress, cook, jeweler, or other, more delicate crafts, the features mentioned above don’t seem well equipped to support those archetypes, even though most of the class does.

My questions are:

1. Should the Artificer be modified in order to better support these archetypes, or would it better to leave the Artificer alone and have these ideas implemented elsewhere in the game?

2. If the Artificer should be modified, how can this best be done? What kinds of features would help the class be more inclusive and representative of the whole spectrum of crafts and trades?

 

[Pedantic]

Those feel more like an alternative class chassis to me. The existing artificer definitely has more of a mad-scientist/gadgeteer/tinkerer vibe than that of a general all-purpose craftsperson model, at least to me.

The crafts you mentioned might be a good fit for a similar spell system, but I feel like their general combat contributions would look different. Probably less direct attacks and more minionmancy/animate objects type abilities?

 

[W'rkncacnter]

honestly, i think magical automaton needs to be changed for more then just flavour - it's just a bad capstone period. it's a pretty bad pet for level 20 and even if it weren't it's absolutely curbstomping on the stitcher's shoes. i think changing that capstone to be an enhanced version of the O5e capstone (like they did with the barbarian -> berserker) would not only do wonders for the capstone mechanically, but to help with this exact issue.

 

[xiphumor]

Those feel more like an alternative class chassis to me. The existing artificer definitely has more of a mad-scientist/gadgeteer/tinkerer vibe than that of a general all-purpose craftsperson model, at least to me.

The crafts you mentioned might be a good fit for a similar spell system, but I feel like their general combat contributions would look different. Probably less direct attacks and more minionmancy/animate objects type abilities?

But then, do we really need TWO crafts-centered classes? It feels a little redundant, and it would be difficult to make them meaningfully distinct from each other.

As for the combat contributions, archetype spell lists seem sufficient to handle that issue.

 

[Pedantic]

But then, do we really need TWO crafts-centered classes? It feels a little redundant, and it would be difficult to make them meaningfully distinct from each other.

As for the combat contributions, archetype spell lists seem sufficient to handle that issue.

I was thinking more about combat chemistry. Artificers are by default chemists and some kind of smith (unless you're playing against type in a way that doesn't use your class features). I suppose that's honestly kind of fine if you want to add in separate archetypes that expand on those existing capabilities in other directions.

 

[Micah Sweet]

While I allow artificers in my game if my players want to play them, I prefer the Craftsman class from Mage Hand Press.