[Eberron] What limits are there on artificers?

[Jeff Wilder]

As I read it, the artificer is an immensely powerful class. Probably the most powerful class in the game. The bonus feats and decent BAB and so forth are all fine, but what strikes me about the class is this:

As far as I can tell, eventually the artificer has absolutely no limit on what spells are available to it, whether through infusions, or spell storing, or created items. Eventually the artificer can do anything.

I'm already seeing this, to a much lesser extent, with the 6th level artificer in my game. He seems to have any spell for any situation. Sure, it may take a little time, or a few UMD checks, or whatever, but there are plenty of situations in which those limitations aren't meaningful.

Am I missing something? Am I wrong to worry about it?

 

[McDungeon]

Isn't exactly a new thing, but yes artificers are powerful as much as the DM let's them be.

Time constraints, gold, and experience, is all under a DM's control. I tend to run with very little downtime to make it precious to the artificer, as well as making melee more useful, so while I've had artificers in game, they're really the versatile powerhouses.

Though, spellstoring infusion with a good enough UMD check will solve a lot of problem, the limited infusions per day should help.

Anyway, I wouldn't worry, just because they're versatile, doesn't mean they have unlimited stamina, nor the time to craft everything... And if they do, why do you think enemy artificers have filcher homunculus?

 

[stonegod]

Powerful, yes.

Borked, no. Can be if you don't watch the abuse (most infusions are minute-long to cast, remember, w/o APs; limiting metamagic to one application per infusion or feat use just is righ thing to do^TM). And just like any magic dependent class, one dispel magic turns an artificer into fighter fodder.

If there are no (appreciable) limits on money and time, any crafting class can dominate.

 

[Henry]

I'm already seeing this, to a much lesser extent, with the 6th level artificer in my game. He seems to have any spell for any situation. Sure, it may take a little time, or a few UMD checks, or whatever, but there are plenty of situations in which those limitations aren't meaningful.

Am I missing something? Am I wrong to worry about it?

The Artificer has two BIIIG limitations: Money, and Time.

Having DM'ed the player of an Artificer from 1st to 15th level, the class is indeed a VERY powerful one; if prepared, he can make a Mystic Theurge look like a pansy apprentice mage/acolyte.

However, if the Gate to Khyber opens in two days, and he's been traipsing in Xendrik for a month until then, with very little scrolls and wands and staves to show for it, he's pretty much screwed.

XP is not a problem -- it's his most free resource. Money, and Time to make things, however, is a real problem. Even if he could buy up anything of any level (and remember that Eberron has a back-story cap on the number of spellcasters and artificers of high level), he still has to spend money, lots of it, to do it. He thrives more on one-shot items than any other character.

Controlling the power of an artificer is as easy for a DM as imposing the character wealth limits and time limits on creating and purchasing items. A spellcaster is fresh after resting for a night and purchasing a few potions or whatnot: the Artificer is in a whole different boat.

One of these days I'd love to engineer a game scenario with an artificer and his party stripped naked and starting in the bowels of a dungeon -- just so I could see the party running around with a rusty Dagger +2, or a Keen Spoon +1, or Light Fortification Loincloth +2.

ONE OTHER NOTE: Beware of allowing him or her to make an "Amulet of Use Magic Device +10" or similar item. It would be the most valuable item they will ever own -- to my great mistake.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Well, there's plenty of time for crafting. I despise D&D's "20 level in 20 weeks" deal, so I use a lot of downtime. Months at a time.

I'm not sure what to do about limiting money. How do I (fairly) limit the gold the artificer gets without also limiting the gold everyone else gets (leaving them underequipped)?

I dunno.

It seems to me that using a spell that's not on the infusion list should be harder than it is. Perhaps it should be a UMD emulation check, with a DC of +2 per level of the spell? (These numbers are off the top of my head. It's the concept that matters.) Something where there's a legitimate chance of failure.

 

[irdeggman]

Also remember that any item an artificer creates is neither arcane nor divine (see the errata).

That means an item that depends on being divine or arcane (like a scroll) always requires a UMD check to use and a scroll created by an artificer can not be scribed into a wizard's spellbook (something several people have attempted to do in the past prior to the errata). Well an artificer requires a UMD check to use an item he creates himself - if it is an item thaat doesn't depend on the spell being divine or arcane (like a wand) a class with the spell on its list follows the normal rules.

 

[Sir Elton]

One of these days I'd love to engineer a game scenario with an artificer and his party stripped naked and starting in the bowels of a dungeon -- just so I could see the party running around with a rusty Dagger +2, or a Keen Spoon +1, or Light Fortification Loincloth +2.

ONE OTHER NOTE: Beware of allowing him or her to make an "Amulet of Use Magic Device +10" or similar item. It would be the most valuable item they will ever own -- to my great mistake.

What. The Slave Lords saga to manly for your players? Pansy players.

 

[hong]

Isn't exactly a new thing, but yes artificers are powerful as much as the DM let's them be.

Time constraints, gold, and experience, is all under a DM's control. I tend to run with very little downtime to make it precious to the artificer, as well as making melee more useful, so while I've had artificers in game, they're really the versatile powerhouses.

That's the thing, though. You're saying that it takes a particular style of DMing to keep the artificer under control, but that doesn't really help a DM whose preferred style is something else. Sure, they could adjust their campaign to fit the artificer, but you can say that about a lot of questionable stuff. That doesn't mean the artificer is uniformly and indisputably broken, but it's a recognition that it won't play well in some people's games.

 

[Henry]

What. The Slave Lords saga to manly for your players? Pansy players.

Darned straight -- They'd cry all the way to the slave pits!

Seriously, I actually ran a variant of that once -- and the "magic stone" spell was the friend of all the PCs that session.

 

[irdeggman]

It seems to me that using a spell that's not on the infusion list should be harder than it is. Perhaps it should be a UMD emulation check, with a DC of +2 per level of the spell? (These numbers are off the top of my head. It's the concept that matters.) Something where there's a legitimate chance of failure.

Creating an item with a spell requires a UMD check of DC 20 + caster level - isn;t that the same thing (or at least real similar).

It also requires a UMD check to use (like every item he creates).