D&D 5E Does the Artificer Suck?

[doctorbadwolf]

Yes, the bladesinger is quite a good tanky caster. But there are things you neglect:

There are spells and abilities that remove your reaction. Especially round 1 can be tricky.
There is damage that can't be reduced by absorb elements or shield.
There are rounds where you need to decide if you want to absorb elements or cast shield.
Having x hp does not tell the whole story. Hit dice to recover lost hp over the course of the day helps a lot. A wizard' s d6 vs a barbarian's d12 makes a big difference.
A fighter has second wind that replenishes theoretically an unlimited times before you could get your long rest.
The tasha's updated bladesinger has a better balance between offense and the availability of bladesong. While 3 to 4 times per day is not too shabby (same for the barbarian rage) it can be abused with hit and run tactics.

All in all a bladesinger is a great tank, but they have their weaknesses too. And it depends on the actual situation who might perform better at the frontlines.

Also depends on what they're accomplishing, and overall group efficacy with different individual strategies.

 

[Tallifer]

The only Artificer I have seen in play is the one created by a student of mine in Korea, but we were using very simplified and flexible rules for my children's game. He drew this for his character Lukasso the Cannoneer:

(See some of my own D&D illustrated stories in my webtoon: Tales from the Gnomish Tarot )

 

[tetrasodium]

I have come to the conclusion the problem isn’t the artificer, it’s the wizard. Now, it’s even taking over threads devoted to other classes!

Most complaints about wizard tend to be overly white room analyzed or ignore a lot of things. The 5e wizard has a lot of problems & I say that having been very clear about artificer problems in this thread. They both suffer from some of the same problems in very much not overpowered ways.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Ya know, I do think the artificer could use some sort of ability to overcharge magic items a few times a day. Like, I've got a big cannon, or a blaster pistol, or whatever, and in the big fight I'm gonna drain one of my infusions to overcharge the hell out of it and basically do a heckin smite with it.

I really think the class should have 1 more infusion per tier, and perhaps earlier access to spell storing item, and then add some infusions that do some funky stuff with spell slots and magic item charges, with the option to gain charges by temporarily draining an infusion (disabling it until you take a short rest?).

Like...maybe give the class Proficiency bonus charges per day, which can be used to make a spell storing item, overcharge a magic item, recharge a magic item's charges as long as those charges can only be used to cast a spell at a rate of 1 charge per spell level, or to supercharge a damage or healing spell.

Spellstoring items would have prof bonus charges at first, and scale up to what they are now at later levels. Maybe even start with 1 charge, if it comes online at low enough level.

Lastly, I'd add infusions that give access to higher level spells. So, you'd get basically a single use scroll with a 6th level spell. It'd be very unique to have a class that is mostly limited to half caster progression, but that can exceed that by not making something like magic armor or weapon or whatever.

 

[ECMO3]

Yeah, the fighter or Barbarian can do solid damage without ditching the shield. GWM is extra. It’s gravy. And you…know a GWM fighter can use a shield and a versatile weapon when they need to be more defensive, yes?

Not really. Not without using limited resources.

A Bladesinger at 9th level with a rapier is doing abase 4d8+2xdex (28) using booming blade and extra attack or 5d8+2dex+int (35.5) using GFB. A fighter or Barbarian with GWM wielding a longsword in 1 hand is doing 2d8+2str (19). A Barbarian is doing another 8 (27) if he is in rage.

Now both of them have subclasses that boost that over the base noted, but the most powerful damage boosts come from battlemaster and are limited use. The Barbarian is also getting hit a lot more even if he does not use reckless attack.

Also you need to use an action to don or doff a shield. So it is not free in combat (admitedly niether is casting a defensive spell on the first turn).

Your whole idea of shield being worth X number of hit points doesn’t even hold up. Your group plays very differently from the dozens of groups I’ve played with or observed, if what you’re saying is from play experience.

Yes it does. Shield is going to prevent a minimum of 1 hit every time it is cast. I said it was about 20hps per casting in tier 2 (CR5-CR8). From the DMG CR5 should haverage 22-28 dpr, CR8 should average 51-56 DPR. Now that is per turn, not per attack. Per attack is going to be lower because many of those have multiattack, but I am confident in that tier it is saving on average 20 points or better per casting.

For example, using the first three CR 6 monsters called out on page 308 of the DMG:
If a sheild stops 1 hit from a Chasme it will save you 40hps
If a shield stops 1 hit from a Chimera it will save 10hps on a horn attack or 11 hps on a bite or claw
If a shield stops 1 hit from a Cyclops it will save 19hps if it was a club attack or 28 hit points if it is a rock attack

That is if the casting only stops that one attack that caused the reaction. Those numbers go up if it stops a multiattack or another creature later in the order from hitting.

If you don't like the 20 that I noted, what number do you think is appropriate in tier 2? How many hit points do you think shield saves on average when cast during tier 2 and give me an example of the enemy you are talking about.

Oh, and barring a cooperative DM, the Wizard has only offensive capability to incentivize enemies to even try to him them. They aren’t a good barrier, they have nothing comparable to the attack incentive of Reckless Attack, etc. So, their abilities to mitigate damage is in direct conflict with their ability to make enemies care, to a much greater degree than any Barbarian.

Reckless attack is awful of you are trying to tank, but a Barbarian wielding a pole arm with reckless attack is very effective if he has a character like a bladesinger engaged to keep the enemies from attacking him.

I agree about making enemies "care" but a hit with booming blade does damage if the enemy moves move without using her reaction at all and if the bladesinger is a human with warcaster she can choose hit the enemy with it again. That is 2d8 right off the bat and another 38 if she chooses to use the reaction. So it is not as easy or free as you make it sound. Altternatively a human with sentinel can do weapon damage and stop moving with a reaction. That of course uses a reaction which if it is early in the initiative order is a high price to pay. But if the enemy in question goes right before the bladesinger it is almost free.

I absolutely agree though a DM is going to try to attack others, just like they are going to try to do if the tank is a high-AC fighter or cleric. The DM won't do that if your "tank" is a 16AC Barbarian using reckless attack. In that case they are going to attack the Barbarian.

But yeah, if your game experience has wizards being effective tanks, you either define “tank” vety differently from how it’s generally used, or your game is very different from any I’ve ever seen or heard of.

A tank is a character that stands in the front of melee and absorbs attacks so squishier strikers or controllers like barbarians, Rogues and other caster and can move hit enemies of their choice for powerful damage or debilitating spells.

Having a bag of hps is one way to tank, but not the most effective way and is generally inferior to using a high AC and other methods to absorb damage.

 

[Zardnaar]

ACs easier to bypass and the Totem Barbarian raging is a pretty good tank/beatstick combo.

 

[ECMO3]

Yes, the bladesinger is quite a good tanky caster. But there are things you neglect:

There are spells and abilities that remove your reaction. Especially round 1 can be tricky.
There is damage that can't be reduced by absorb elements or shield.
There are rounds where you need to decide if you want to absorb elements or cast shield.
Having x hp does not tell the whole story. Hit dice to recover lost hp over the course of the day helps a lot. A wizard' s d6 vs a barbarian's d12 makes a big difference.
A fighter has second wind that replenishes theoretically an unlimited times before you could get your long rest.
The tasha's updated bladesinger has a better balance between offense and the availability of bladesong. While 3 to 4 times per day is not too shabby (same for the barbarian rage) it can be abused with hit and run tactics.

All in all a bladesinger is a great tank, but they have their weaknesses too. And it depends on the actual situation who might perform better at the frontlines.

Those are all legit arguements except for the hit dice.

The d12 hit dice is worth 3 hps per level. In an adventuring day a Barbarian who is in reach of the enemy every turn is going to burn more than 3hps per level over the course of a day compared to a high AC character. I think a well armored fighter is better in this regard, especially considering second wind. One point though, once you make it to tier 2, false life upcast out of combat more than makes up for this difference and is generally going to be more available than second wind. Tier 1 false life is not very good because both the hps and spell slots are so limited, but tier 2 and especially tier 3 it is a boatload of temp hps available and is probably the best spell pairing with contingency once you hit 11th level.

Agree completely on situations. Certainly some encounters play to weaknesses. For example three Banshees are going to wreak havoc on a bladesinger because it is a con save against its most powerful action, there are no reactions you can use against it and bladesong does nothing for you. (I chose Banshee because I actually had a 7th level bladesinger go down to 0 against banshees in a game this afternoon ). While other casters might have a silence spell to help out, it is unlikely a bladesinger has silence prepared since level 2 is gobbled up by defense spells and maybe shadowblade.

 

[ECMO3]

ACs easier to bypass and the Totem Barbarian raging is a pretty good tank/beatstick combo.

Only the bear totem, the others are not that good at tanking and damage that bypasses AC will also generally bypass the basic barbarian damage resistance in rage. Not always but usually it will.

 

[Zardnaar]

Only the bear totem, the others are not that good at tanking and damage that bypasses AC will also generally bypass the basic barbarian damage resistance in rage. Not always but usually it will.

Yep barbarian is more beatstick.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Not really. Not without using limited resources.

A Bladesinger at 9th level with a rapier is doing abase 4d8+2xdex (28) using booming blade and extra attack or 5d8+2dex+int (35.5) using GFB.

And dying if someone makes them do a con save vs high damage, or just...rolls high. BSs are really fun, but to keep them alive in the front lines generally requires help from the team or multi-classing.

A fighter or Barbarian with GWM wielding a longsword in 1 hand is doing 2d8+2str (19). A Barbarian is doing another 8 (27) if he is in rage.

Okay. That's plenty to eat a decent chunk of even a beefy enemy's HP every round, and then enemies have advantage on attacks against the Barbarian.

Let the Bladesinger never get hit by casting shield or absorb elements every round. Great! My "I like to challenge my PCs" grin gets wider with every spell slot spent staying alive in a situation they could have just played a beefier Gish to survive in. Gonna be fun watching them twitch when the non-combat parts of the adventure set up choice after choice where they really want to cast spells, followed by another tough fight. Meanwhile, the Barbarian has spent a few HD and a Rage when that second fight starts.

Now both of them have subclasses that boost that over the base noted, but the most powerful damage boosts come from battlemaster and are limited use. The Barbarian is also getting hit a lot more even if he does not use reckless attack.

No more than most melee characters. If the team is facing a really tough enemy that hits a lot for solid damage, the Barbarian can put a shield on. But also I've never seen a Barbarian with low AC.

Also you need to use an action to don or doff a shield. So it is not free in combat (admitedly niether is casting a defensive spell on the first turn).

Everyone has to make action economy decisions. This doesn't particularly change anything about the comparison.

Yes it does. Shield is going to prevent a minimum of 1 hit every time it is cast. I said it was about 20hps per casting in tier 2 (CR5-CR8). From the DMG CR5 should haverage 22-28 dpr, CR8 should average 51-56 DPR. Now that is per turn, not per attack. Per attack is going to be lower because many of those have multiattack, but I am confident in that tier it is saving on average 20 points or better per casting.

That is white room math that doesn't actually reflect the game at the table. Shield doesn't have an HP value, even at a given tier. Just the assumption of such a tiny CR range for a tier of leveling makes the math next to useless for anything but broad comparative math to understand how the system generally works. It doesn't actually tell you what will happen at the table.

But really, that CR range. I just....dude, no. Everything from CR 1 or even lower, to CR 10 or even higher, depending on party composition, numbers, skill level, campaign style (in some campaigns, I will throw somewhere from most to more than the recommended daily XP budget into 1-2 fights, while in others I'll spread it over 3-5 fights, but in all of them the party is going to have to use resources outside of combat), magic items (in a high magic item campaign like my current Eberron campaign, I have to put most of the daily xp budget into one fight, with some backup options to turn the heat up, in order to actually challenge the 6 PC party), and other factors.

In some fights, the Bladesinger will have an easier time using their resources offensively and standing up in melee, while in others they're gonna get hit or have to use shield any time my behir rolls a 10, so...they're gonna let the fighter or Barbarian stand in front of it and keep it's attention. Why woudln't they? To prove a point? They gonna burn through half their slots in one fight without doing anything to anyone with them to prove a point? They can literally still be a swashbuckling swordmaster without tanking.

Reckless attack is awful of you are trying to tank,

LOL yikes. You playing a different game, or what?

but a Barbarian wielding a pole arm with reckless attack is very effective if he has a character like a bladesinger engaged to keep the enemies from attacking him.

LOLOL the Barbarian with a greatsword with reckless attack is also very effective, and the polearm barbarian would rather have a paladin or fighter keeping the enemy off him. Of course, the bladesinger probably has 10 or 12 strength, so all the enemy has to do is shove him.

I agree about making enemies "care" but a hit with booming blade does damage if the enemy moves move without using her reaction at all and if the bladesinger is a human with warcaster she can choose hit the enemy with it again.

Human with warcaster is pretty rarified to use to try to prove a general point. Most players don't even take feats until their 3rd ASI or later, if at all.
Making enemies care is...one of the primary pillars of tanking. It's absolutely central to the strategy. That's why people complain that there is was basically no tanking except for sword and board battlemasters and polearm+sentinel builds in the PHB, and even they are so damn limited by having only one reaction. It's damn hard to set up a situation where it sucks for the enemy to attack someone other than you, or punish them for it (more than once per round).

I absolutely agree though a DM is going to try to attack others, just like they are going to try to do if the tank is a high-AC fighter or cleric. The DM won't do that if your "tank" is a 16AC Barbarian using reckless attack. In that case they are going to attack the Barbarian.

Yes, making the Barbarian the better tank. Because the Barbarian will most likely survive that, and healing on the Barbarian is effectively doubled when they're raging.

A tank is a character that stands in the front of melee and absorbs attacks so squishier strikers or controllers like barbarians, Rogues and other caster and can move hit enemies of their choice for powerful damage or debilitating spells.

LOL squishier strikers or controllers like barbarians. Oof.

A tank does basically 3 things.

• Get physically in the way, and stay there
• Make themselves a better target than other party members
• Make themselves "sticky" or otherwise difficult to get around or ignore

The best games for playing a tank are ones that have mechanics that let you create lose/lose scenarios for enemies, where attacking you and staying put is the least terrible choice out of terrible choices for most enemies in a given fight. 5e is definitely not a great game for playing a tank, though later subclasses for the tank-friendly classes have helped a bit.

Having a bag of hps is one way to tank, but not the most effective way and is generally inferior to using a high AC and other methods to absorb damage.

This is simply false. High AC is a severely limited way to tank. Low HP tanks are very difficult to make effective compared to high HP tanks with even moderately high AC, like the average barbarian.