D&D 5E Does the Artificer Suck?

[FrogReaver]

Anytime you are comparing anything against wizards and it's not an obvious blowout you know it's probably an ok option. Wizard are probably the best class in the game at performing most roles depending on what content is in play and what has become the normalized adventuring day.

While the gap between full casters(mostly wizards) and the rest is smaller 5e it still exists it will continue to grow as they continuously have growth due to spells being added In addition to new class options. They can't help it. Spell casting is just where the slap on a lot of new content.

Well, I compared them to a Wizards cantrips damage to show they were quite lacking in the damage department. The reply I got was that they got a bunch of other stuff to make up for it, which essentially ignored all the better stuff wizards get at that level.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes. But it still comes down to how many encounters per long rest. And if you know that you only have a few, you waste way too many spells.
As soon as we adopted a different rest method, the shadow monk for example started to keep up quite well at level 8 to 10, as ki points actually recharged more often than spells.

A level 11 caster can use 1 big (level 3+) concentration spell in every encounter in even long adventuring days.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A level 11 caster can use 1 big (level 3+) concentration spell in every encounter in even long adventuring days

Yes. And they should better keep it up all encounter. So lets hope they have someone blocking some damage coming towards them.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes. And they should better keep it up all encounter. So lets hope they have someone blocking some damage coming towards them.

Not really. By the way, you take up some odd positions to argue.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Not really. By the way, you take up some odd positions to argue.

You too.

Edit: I see so much white room analysis and absolutes which are not true for normal play at the table.

It always sounds as if you do something wrong not playing a wizard. That is not true at all and I don't want people new to the forum read it and think an all wizard party is the only way to go.
Or an all dex based crossbow experts.

 

[FrogReaver]

You too.

Edit: I see so much white room analysis and absolutes which are not true for normal play at the table.

It always sounds as if you do something wrong not playing a wizard.

I think you read too much into what I'm saying and argue with what you are reading into it - trying to force the conversation to conform to those assumptions.

The point stands that if the main purpose of your subclass is control and getting enemies to not attack your allies that wizards do it much better than armorer's. Heck, monks do it much better as well. You are a bit better at it than ancestral guardian Barbarians though and most any fighter or paladin.

That is not true at all and I don't want people new to the forum read it and think an all wizard party is the only way to go.
Or an all dex based crossbow experts.

You are adding alot to my words to reach the conclusion that those positions are mine. I don't advocate for all wizard parties. I don't advocate for all ranged parties. I'm one of the strongest advocates for a well rounded and mixed party that you can find. So please don't put those positions in my mouth.

 

[Stoutstien]

Well, I compared them to a Wizards cantrips damage to show they were quite lacking in the damage department. The reply I got was that they got a bunch of other stuff to make up for it, which essentially ignored all the better stuff wizards get at that level.

I missed that comparison. Artillerist would be the most natural one as a at-will spell slinger to stack up against the wizard and I don't think the gap is that large. Potent cantrip is nice and evokers are low key a contender for best PC option but EAF/arcane firearm + homunculus is solid at-will for a half caster.

Ive ran all wizard and all artificer games and they both handled deadly +(++) challenges up and including 20-30 total rounds of combat easy enough for both to be considered good/great/amazing.

 

[FrogReaver]

I missed that comparison. Artillerist would be the most natural one as a at-will spell slinger to stack up against the wizard and I don't think the gap is that large. Potent cantrip is nice and evokers are low key a contender for best PC option but EAF/arcane firearm + homunculus is solid at-will for a half caster.

The comparison was to show how weak armorers damage actually is. Bringing artillerist into this doesn't change that.

 

[Stoutstien]

The comparison was to show how weak armorers damage actually is. Bringing artillerist into this doesn't change that.

Armorer is definitely a tier below BS and artillerist until the late game unless they really work at it like a goblin using their racial feature and SS to leverage the infiltrator option.

 

[FrogReaver]

Armorer is definitely a tier below BS and artillerist until the late game

Agreed

unless they really work at it like a goblin using their racial feature and SS to leverage the infiltrator option.

Sure, but that takes away the coolest benefit - the disadvantage to attack allies - which is the melee only option.