Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Levistus's_Leviathan" data-source="post: 8394904" data-attributes="member: 7023887">Yeah, I'm not seeing it. I have a Warforged Artificer in my campaign, and they're definitely not any more powerful or game-breaking than any of the other party members, and none of them are hyper-maximized or anything, either. The most notable mechanics for the Warforged are its static +1 to AC, which is roughly equivalent to the Defense Fighting Style. That's just a passive 5% less chance of being hit by an attack roll, which isn't a game-changer, and comes at the expense of having to take a full hour to don or doff any armor that you want to wear (sure, no one else can take off your armor, but this is such a small "buff" that will almost never come up, that it might as well be ignored for most campaigns). Overall, this is a buff is good, but it has drawbacks, and isn't game-breakingly amazing. Everyone likes it, which is exactly what racial features should do. Next, Constructed Resilience (and the feature attached to it, Sentry's Rest). First, poison resistance, which Dwarves also get. Second, the lack to eat, drink, or breathe. This is good, but very situational, and won't come up in basically any campaigns that don't track rations or waterskins (which are a lot). Again, not gamebreaking, even in a gritty-survival campaign, it's just a good benefit. Third, immunity to disease. This is also just a minor buff that will almost never come up. And if it does (like in a plague-campaign), it could be built into the story (like the Warforged PC sees all of his friends and fellow PCs waste and die from disease). Finally, the immunity to sleep and non-unconscious long rest. This is basically Trance (with a tiny, negligible part of Fey Ancestry). Then, there's a bit of tool, language, and skills proficiencies (which are pretty standard pre-Tasha's, and also aren't game-breaking). I mean, absolutely none of this is game-breaking, expect potentially in some very niche, very uncommon campaigns (like a plague campaign, or a gritty-survival campaign, or in one where sleeping is essential to the plot, somehow). Even the good, less-situational mechanical buffs aren't OP. Dwarves get poison resistance from Dwarven Resilience, Grung and Yuan-Ti both get full-on Poison Immunity at level 1 (Yuan-Ti are definitely OP, I'm just showing that there's a precedent for abilities on par with - or more powerful than - Constructed Resilience). A static +1 to AC is great, but nothing amazing (it's basically the exact same as the AC boost that Simic Hybrids can choose at level 5). Most of the racial Natural Armor features are better than a Warforged's Integrated Protection feature, like the Lizardfolk's Natural Armor or, better yet, the Loxodon's Natural Armor that scales with your CON score. None of this is OP. In the vast majority of campaigns, Warforged will be absolutely fine and not game-breaking in the slightest. Next, Artificers. I've seen a few people claim that the Artificer is underpowered (this thread is a great example), but I've seen even fewer people claim that it's OP/gamebreaking/"a munchkin's dream". Frankly, I think both of these claims are pretty ridiculous, and I tend to give more weight to the ones complaining that it's underpowered (the Alchemist subclass does exist, after all). I mean, they literally have the same armor proficiencies as a Ranger, but less weapon proficiencies, a smaller hit die, and have to trade their Fighting Style, their Extra Attack, and other martial features for 2 cantrips and a handful of infusions. They're half-casters, and they get a tiny bit more casting than Rangers/Paladins (this difference is even slighter if the Ranger/Paladin takes the Divine/Druidic Warrior Fighting Style), but aren't martial, they're primarily buff-based (and they can buff themselves if they choose to). The primary complaint that I've heard about Artificers being OP was one guy ranting about how they can "create rare magic items at level 2!" (which isn't true, they can only create 1 rare magic item equivalent at level 2, which is a bit of +1 Armor that won't break any game), and besides that, I haven't heard any valid or reasonable complaint about them being OP. IMO, they're much less OP than a Paladin, and roughly equivalent to new Rangers in their power-scale. They do get nice features, and are versatile (much like the Warlock), but none of their subclasses are OP, none of their features are OP, and none of their spells are OP (they don't even get unique spells, they're mostly piggy-backing off of the Wizard and a bit from the Cleric). In my experience, Paladins, Wizards, Clerics, Bards, and even Rogues have been more game-breaking than Artificers. And, in my experience, Aasimar, Elves, Mountain Dwarves, Yuan-Ti, Satyrs, and Dragonmarked Races have been much more powerful than Warforged. I just don't see how Warforged Artificers could be gamebreaking, unless in a very niche campaign, especially not gamebreaking enough for you to advocate/support removing them from the game. Care to explain/rebutt anything?</blockquote>

Verification