D&D 5E Does the Artificer Suck?

[Zardnaar]

I have an artificer in my game I run. It's a Battle Smith currently level 6. I've seen it played since level 1.

Anyway it's not really impressing me. It's a half caster that's a bit meh at dealing damage compared with Paladins and Rangers.

It looks like it may get better latter around level 10 or so but that's to late imho.

And the other subclasses look worse than the battlesmith.

Rangers copped a lot if flak for sucking but this class seems worse.

Thoughts?

 

[jasper]

Anything sucks if you don't like the build. I have two fans of it at my table.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think it sucks, but I’m biased. It does the job it was made for passably, I just don’t like the job it was made for.

 

[bedir than]

It seems that your only measure of suck is DPR, which is fine, for a specific type of gamer.

But that will always result in certain build types being judged as awful. The Artificer can do lots of support in combat, are immeasurably valuable in exploration (a steel defender & homunculus exploration team can do a lot), and are fine in social situations.

You may not get what you want if you want only a combat build.

 

[commandercrud]

No.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

They don't suck, but as the only support oriented half-caster, they play different than other classes. They are not as good at dealing damage as Paladins and Rangers, it's true, because they are not intended to be so, not even the more martial oriented Battle Smith. But they can handle a lot of utility those classes can't, and they are the only class that provides their own magic items. Depending on the campaign those strengths may be negligible or incredibly important.

I would say my issue with them is not that they should have higher damage output or such, but rather that they are a little too magic oriented for the number of spell slots they have and spells they can prepare.

 

[Blue]

Had one at our table and it worked out pretty good. Bonus action damage or buffing, and action for melee (for battlesmith or armorer), cantrip (which advances just like any caster), spell, or activate a magic item. You're also a buffer to help others in your party without the need to sacrifice actions in combat.

 

[tetrasodium]

I have an artificer in my game I run. It's a Battle Smith currently level 6. I've seen it played since level 1.

Anyway it's not really impressing me. It's a half caster that's a bit meh at dealing damage compared with Paladins and Rangers.

It looks like it may get better latter around level 10 or so but that's to late imho.

And the other subclasses look worse than the battlesmith.

Rangers copped a lot if flak for sucking but this class seems worse.

Thoughts?

the level 10 part is the artificer's biggest problem. Being a half caster instead of 2/3 or full caster means that your leveled spells will generally be equaled or exceeded by your cantrips (which is really bad for a caster). The artilerist is very good in the role of "I cast(or continue concentrating on) web and pulse my temphp turret" but for damage it doesn't really open up as a meaningful choice till 15 when it can pull out a second cannon. Stick a warlock monk & other short rest classes in a group with to say "lets take a short rest" over & over again to remind the artilerist looking at their leveled cantip equivalent spells that they personally are really only benefitting from it by getting to expend another spell slot to recover the turret that just melted while the warlock recovered his nova capability.

In general it has some strong points, but as a whole the experience of playing one is largely going to be shining a spotlight on how too many areas it should either excel or at least stand respectably with others are hindered by the same fears of letting casters be good at being casters even more so than other casters as 1/2 casters

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

It has got good flavor, but for damage, utility or buffing there are better alternatives. As the fifth character in a party that has those other roles filled, it probably is fine, if a bit underwhelming.

It probably needs to be a full caster to fill the utility role better at lower levels, but it might start stepping on other classes toes at that point and the game wasn't really calling out for more full casters.

 

[Nod_Hero]

No.

What they said.