D&D 5E Does the Artificer Suck?

[Ashrym]

Sone of those abilities come later where I've already said the artificer picks up steam.

The first few levels are the critical parts though. Tool use is inferior to skill use the best tool is also a rogue thing they can take expertise in.

They're only half casters that don't get that many spell slots and they don't really deal much extra dage with them like paladins and Rangers.

And it's conditional damage to boot on 2/4 classes.

Sure they get some class features but so do other classes. Is the opportunity cost.

And the opportunity cost involved in not commanding you turret or mechanical beast if you want to use your bonus action for anything else.

In order:

1. The majority of the abilities listed are in the first two tiers.
2. Tool use benefits are better than no tool use benefits. The infusions that enhance skill use beat the skill use examples you were giving, and can also add flash of genius. Tool expertise is one of multiple tools to enhance checks. Ignoring the full suite of abilities doesn't prove your point. In what way are artificers really behind the ball in skill use compared to most characters?
3. I gave an argument refuting "only half casters" number of spell slots earlier. Number of spell slots is misleading because the argument you gave was using them up at an alarming rate on the cleric while the artificer examples were using infusions and long-lasting low level slots in comparison in my examples. It doesn't matter if a full caster has 1.5 times the spell slots if they use them up twice as fast (loose numbers for easy illustration). Spell slot economy is a thing too. ;-)
4. What conditions would those be to which you refer?
5. All classes get "some class features". Using "opportunity cost" as a buzzword doesn't demonstrate your point. It's also a reversible point of view because not taking the artificer class costs the opportunity to provide infusions.
6. All classes need to either pick up an option for using the bonus action or choose how to use it. Having good bonus bonus actions that the subclasses want to use in order to create that "opportunity cost" is not con to the subclass. If that were the case then crossbow expert would suck because the bonus action creates an opportunity cost preventing the PC from wanting to use other bonus actions.

if you could do all of that as well as a fighter wizard rogue of the same level I would seriously question the design decision. As it is, you can do a lot to a reasonable level.

That's exactly it. Artificers can do a lot at a reasonable level.

You mean like a cleric?

Sure, if clerics had infusions.

Just overall. Artificer didn't do that much relative to other options.

Relative to higher ended options.

Two powergamers looked over it and couldn't really do anything better except the Battlesmith gave some infusions away.

That comment looks like they weren't the powergamers you present based on my own experience with the classes.

3 of them are sold as combat type classes but they're not that good at combat or support.

Sold as by whom? And you haven't demonstrated that lack of being good at combat or support. I pointed out that artillerists were popping out standard cantrip damage with bonus damage on top from subclass and can guarantee enhanced arcane focus for accuracy, plus spend a bonus action for damage that starts at 2d8 and increases to 6d8, plus spend concentration on an additional DOT spell just like a cleric.

In that same example I pointed out that the cleric is burning a 2nd-level slot that lasts a minute and a 3rd-level slot that lasts ten minutes. The artillerist is burning a 1st-level slot that last an hour and a 1st-level slot that lasts up to a minute.

Most casters would give a lot to have a bonus action attack like the cannons for the cheap slot cost, long duration, and no concentration. I'm not seeing cannons as poor combat or poor support before looking at other options.

And the battlesmith is generally regarded as "the best" one.

By whom? Appeal to the masses isn't a valid argument.

Clerics in my groups aren't competing with Rogues and similar for damage they're beating them.

Your example required your clerics to be using slots almost exclusively for damage, the damage the rogues and clerics were doing would require context, and that's a comparison to rogues at your table with clerics at your table. It's anecdotal at best and lacks context on the why and how.

But in game your pet dies occasionally so that kicks your dpr in the love spuds.

In game your cleric, fighter, or paladin dies and that kicks your dpr in the love spuds. If the pet soaks up damage that the artificer doesn't take that's a pro, not a con. The combined hp totals exceeds the other classes in question.

But if a pet dies, DPR goes down and doesn't stop. If the cleric, paladin, or fighter drop so does their DPR.

As I pointed out earlier, mending between encounters is almost cost free for artificer pets. PC's not so much.

LOL. Well until I just now sit down and analyzed the Battlesmith in full I kind of that it was meh. It's actually pretty dang good through heroic. Though it may fall behind by level 11.

It's amazing how much better characters look when you don't leave abilities out of the equation.

Level high level is good to artificers. The spell storing item is exceptionally good for things other than damage and that's why Zard will refute it by claiming he doesn't play higher levels.

Attuning extra magic items is good. 2 cannons that do 3d8 each of force or fire damage (when not doing temp hp) for no concentration on a bonus action for a 1st level slot that last an hour is good. The can also be AoE detonated by choice and grant 50% cover to anyone in an aura around them while dealing damage or giving thp.

I don't see the other artificer subclasses being very good.

I do. I don't see them doing the same damage some of the high end damage dealers and that's not the same thing. ;-)

The only thing I've seen the artillerist have going for it is the temp hp cannon. That things a beast at level 3. It's still decent later but it falls off pretty hard as enemies get to hit harder and harder.

The issue with the thp is they only matter if the party is taking damage every round, and if another good source of thp is available then the thp redundancy issue comes into play.

The options for bonus damage or thp make them more versatile and a tool, and artillerists are not hurting for damage using them that way.

 

[Ashrym]

If you're using CBE you're not using your steel defender. See the problem now?

Yes. You still think having a good bonus action attack instead of using crossbow expert is somehow an issue. It frees up the artificer to take a different feat / ASI.

I'll remind you that you have repeated that you don't play into the 3rd tier. You have 2 ASI/feats in the levels you say you play. That means your characters taking SS/CBE are using up both of them. If the artificer takes sharpshooter at 4th level and the (insert x class here) takes sharpshooter at 4th level then CBE doesn't happen, but the battle smith still has the defender and the artillerist still has the cannons. At 8th level the artificers take a feat or an ASI while the other class is adding CBE just to catch up to having that bonus action attack?

It doesn't make sense that you keep limiting your comparison to level 8 because both feats are there and that's when clerics add bonus damage to attacks, but 3rd level spells come too late at 9th level for artificers and levels above that are beyond what people play.

 

[FrogReaver]

Level high level is good to artificers. The spell storing item is exceptionally good for things other than damage and that's why Zard will refute it by claiming he doesn't play higher levels.

Sure.

Attuning extra magic items is good. 2 cannons that do 3d8 each of force or fire damage (when not doing temp hp) for no concentration on a bonus action for a 1st level slot that last an hour is good. The can also be AoE detonated by choice and grant 50% cover to anyone in an aura around them while dealing damage or giving thp.

3d10+7d8 = 48
That's more damage than a EB+Agonozing+Hex at level 15. So it's not bad damage, but not great damage. Adding in the infusions really helps bring up effectiveness.

I do. I don't see them doing the same damage some of the high end damage dealers and that's not the same thing. ;-)

Sure. But you've got to have some pretty good replacements as all artificers can do the infusions.

The issue with the thp is they only matter if the party is taking damage every round, and if another good source of thp is available then the thp redundancy issue comes into play.

You can take the higher temp hp value even if you aren't taking damage every round. It's not a great boost and won't always be a temp hp boost, but it can be used to boost temp hp higher.

The options for bonus damage or thp make them more versatile and a tool, and artillerists are not hurting for damage using them that way.

Sure.

 

[FrogReaver]

Only one artificer can do that.

Also of note: Only 1 very specific fighter uses SS+XBE+Precision attack to get high DPR numbers. Take away any of those feats/manuevers and the damage drops pretty fast.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The only thing I've seen the artillerist have going for it is the temp hp cannon. That things a beast at level 3. It's still decent later but it falls off pretty hard as enemies get to hit harder and harder.

At higher levels the half cover benefit is a bigger deal, especially since you can stick a THP cannon in your tank’s backpack, hold your damage cannon, and your frontline has free THP and an AC boost, while your back line has an AC boost and you’re doing 2d8 force or 2d8 AOE fire as a bonus action.

They also have a great extra spell list, and do extra damage with attack spells. In actual play experience, they kick ass.

You'll have to elaborate on the armorer build because I'm not seeing it.

What build? That’s the thing, none of the artificer subclasses need any special build to shine. If you’re referring to my level 6 comment, IMO the armorer benefits more from having more infusions, especially if you prefer Guardian armor, so level 6 is where the armorer stops feeling restricted by the small number of infusions.

Obviously it really takes off at level 9, but it’s solid and fun from level 3.

Alchemist isn’t even “bad”, it just isn’t a damage-focused specialty.

My biggest complaint of the artificer is simply that it puts too many very strong options in the same space as fluff ribbon options in the infusions, gives too few infusions overall especially at low levels, and overvalues the power level of some stuff and thus puts it too high in the level progression or limits it too much.

When I say it could have more Spellcasting without losing anything, it’s because it’s a generally solid class but it has room to grow, and it’s combat power is generally very at-will so more spells is mostly going to boost utility.

 

[Zardnaar]

In order:

1. The majority of the abilities listed are in the first two tiers.
2. Tool use benefits are better than no tool use benefits. The infusions that enhance skill use beat the skill use examples you were giving, and can also add flash of genius. Tool expertise is one of multiple tools to enhance checks. Ignoring the full suite of abilities doesn't prove your point. In what way are artificers really behind the ball in skill use compared to most characters?
3. I gave an argument refuting "only half casters" number of spell slots earlier. Number of spell slots is misleading because the argument you gave was using them up at an alarming rate on the cleric while the artificer examples were using infusions and long-lasting low level slots in comparison in my examples. It doesn't matter if a full caster has 1.5 times the spell slots if they use them up twice as fast (loose numbers for easy illustration). Spell slot economy is a thing too. ;-)
4. What conditions would those be to which you refer?
5. All classes get "some class features". Using "opportunity cost" as a buzzword doesn't demonstrate your point. It's also a reversible point of view because not taking the artificer class costs the opportunity to provide infusions.
6. All classes need to either pick up an option for using the bonus action or choose how to use it. Having good bonus bonus actions that the subclasses want to use in order to create that "opportunity cost" is not con to the subclass. If that were the case then crossbow expert would suck because the bonus action creates an opportunity cost preventing the PC from wanting to use other bonus actions.

That's exactly it. Artificers can do a lot at a reasonable level.



Sure, if clerics had infusions.



Relative to higher ended options.



That comment looks like they weren't the powergamers you present based on my own experience with the classes.



Sold as by whom? And you haven't demonstrated that lack of being good at combat or support. I pointed out that artillerists were popping out standard cantrip damage with bonus damage on top from subclass and can guarantee enhanced arcane focus for accuracy, plus spend a bonus action for damage that starts at 2d8 and increases to 6d8, plus spend concentration on an additional DOT spell just like a cleric.

In that same example I pointed out that the cleric is burning a 2nd-level slot that lasts a minute and a 3rd-level slot that lasts ten minutes. The artillerist is burning a 1st-level slot that last an hour and a 1st-level slot that lasts up to a minute.

Most casters would give a lot to have a bonus action attack like the cannons for the cheap slot cost, long duration, and no concentration. I'm not seeing cannons as poor combat or poor support before looking at other options.



By whom? Appeal to the masses isn't a valid argument.



Your example required your clerics to be using slots almost exclusively for damage, the damage the rogues and clerics were doing would require context, and that's a comparison to rogues at your table with clerics at your table. It's anecdotal at best and lacks context on the why and how.



In game your cleric, fighter, or paladin dies and that kicks your dpr in the love spuds. If the pet soaks up damage that the artificer doesn't take that's a pro, not a con. The combined hp totals exceeds the other classes in question.

But if a pet dies, DPR goes down and doesn't stop. If the cleric, paladin, or fighter drop so does their DPR.

As I pointed out earlier, mending between encounters is almost cost free for artificer pets. PC's not so much.



Level high level is good to artificers. The spell storing item is exceptionally good for things other than damage and that's why Zard will refute it by claiming he doesn't play higher levels.

Attuning extra magic items is good. 2 cannons that do 3d8 each of force or fire damage (when not doing temp hp) for no concentration on a bonus action for a 1st level slot that last an hour is good. The can also be AoE detonated by choice and grant 50% cover to anyone in an aura around them while dealing damage or giving thp.



I do. I don't see them doing the same damage some of the high end damage dealers and that's not the same thing. ;-)



The issue with the thp is they only matter if the party is taking damage every round, and if another good source of thp is available then the thp redundancy issue comes into play.

The options for bonus damage or thp make them more versatile and a tool, and artillerists are not hurting for damage using them that way.

We were playing level 10 will probably wrap it up soon and lockdown kick in the love spuds.

Most people don't play high level anecdotally nor online it seems.

That's why I rate the first 6-7 levels the most then the next 3 then we 2 and 13+ for the most part doesn't matter.

Artificer does get good later on at levels people don't really play eg less than 10% of the playerbase if not lower.

 

[Zardnaar]

At higher levels the half cover benefit is a bigger deal, especially since you can stick a THP cannon in your tank’s backpack, hold your damage cannon, and your frontline has free THP and an AC boost, while your back line has an AC boost and you’re doing 2d8 force or 2d8 AOE fire as a bonus action.

They also have a great extra spell list, and do extra damage with attack spells. In actual play experience, they kick ass.

What build? That’s the thing, none of the artificer subclasses need any special build to shine. If you’re referring to my level 6 comment, IMO the armorer benefits more from having more infusions, especially if you prefer Guardian armor, so level 6 is where the armorer stops feeling restricted by the small number of infusions.

Obviously it really takes off at level 9, but it’s solid and fun from level 3.

Alchemist isn’t even “bad”, it just isn’t a damage-focused specialty.

My biggest complaint of the artificer is simply that it puts too many very strong options in the same space as fluff ribbon options in the infusions, gives too few infusions overall especially at low levels, and overvalues the power level of some stuff and thus puts it too high in the level progression or limits it too much.

When I say it could have more Spellcasting without losing anything, it’s because it’s a generally solid class but it has room to grow, and it’s combat power is generally very at-will so more spells is mostly going to boost utility.

Armorer looks a lot of fun level 9. I think they need half of that ability earlier and the rest at 9.

All artificers get decent lvl 10 I can even build an ok combat alchemist that level.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Armorer looks a lot of fun level 9. I think they need half of that ability earlier and the rest at 9.

All artificers get decent lvl 10 I can even build an ok combat alchemist that level.

The whole class could use some of its higher level toys coming online earlier and then getting better later. Spell storing item, for instance.

 

[Zardnaar]

The whole class could use some of its higher level toys coming online earlier and then getting better later. Spell storing item, for instance.

Yeah that's essentially the big problem I have for the class.

Level 10 big power spike.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Well and raining down an arcane firearm and possibly cannons…

The alchemist has no arcane firearm, but using a musket will be enough.