D&D 5E [GUIDE] So art lies hid by its own artifice - an artificer guide

[ContrapuntalAnt]

Really? Not being the typical artificer (whatever that even means) is you're criteria & whole explanation to rate this as "Avoid at all costs"?
Avoid because....? What, the 1st image in your head isn't of a dragon-man making things/brewing potions? It has a poor stat set up for the class? Something else?

Provide an explanation. Mechanics based preferably. Setting based if plausible (I don't know anything about Ebberon, maybe there's a story reason to avoid that race/class combo there?)

I'm sorry, but if you're writing a guide, write something useful. Or at least reasoned. You're DB rating isn't. And when I run across non-useful stuff in guides? It automatically devalues everything else you've written.
At least you've avoided the useless + snide commentary often seen in Treantmonks stuff....

Worse yet? You're writing a guide based on PLAYTEST material. You're discouraging playtesting with your ratings.


*I care not one wit about Dragonborn themselves.

1. I meant mechanics, but I accept it was sloppy wording. As noted at the start of the document, this is still WIP (work in progress). I'm adding to it and modifying it as I go along. A number of things are lacking in detailed or indeed any proper comment. I intend to change this.

2. It was CERTAINLY not my intention to dissuade people from playing ANY combination if that's what they want to play. This is my subjective opinion on the efficacy, primarily in mechanical terms, of the options available. This is a RPG, and the most important part is to have fun. I apologise for giving an impression that different in any way from that, and will make that clear at the start of the first post.

3. To that end, I will change the red criterion from "avoid at all costs" (wording taken from other guides) to a different descriptor. On reflection that is horrendously negative wording.

4. There are undoubtedly other parts of the guide which are currently deficient. Hopefully I will address these parts in due course, but in the meantime do feel free to continue to identify them. But could you perhaps start with the assumption that I am creating this in good faith? While I fully and truly appreciate the content of your critique, it was posted in what came across as quite an acerbic tone. Apologies if I have misread that.

[MENTION=20564]Blue[/MENTION]: thank you for the continued commentary/additions! I don't have time (/energy, long day!) to go through those numbers at the moment, but it's always good to get some quantitative analysis for those who like comparing that way

 

[Ark the Pie King]

Say what're your thoughts on a SAD V Human Artificer who takes Magical Secrets to get Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade? I was thinking Artillerist for a combination blaster/tank build utilizing the Temp HP from the turret and the shield spell for tankiness and taking advantage of having 2 good saves. Medium Armor and Shields would get a pretty respectable AC
The only problem is having so limited spell slots and not really any other class features means you might run dry fairly quickly. Thoughts?

Edit: Nevermind, this wouldn't work. My first 5e character was a Hexblade with Green Flame Blade so I got thrown off from using Cha for the attack back then. I guess this build could still technically work, though you'd have to invest in Dex for attack rolls. Though upon reflection it really strikes me as discount Hexblade/Sorcerer multiclass.

 

[Jacqual]

Green-Flame Blade and Booming Blade are both on the Wizards spell list, so taking Magic Initiate: Wizard grants 2 cantrips and a 1st level spell. I would recommend other cantrips such as Shocking Grasp, and Minor Illusion 1st level spell Find Familiar this actually really compliments the Alchemist as the pet they have is not a Familiar granting you 2 little friends one of which allows you to cast touch range spells through. Which is why I put shocking grasp there for incase you have someone that needs to get away from someone without risking an attack of oppurtunity.

 

[Nod_Hero]

Feral Tiefling variant from SCAG seems like a pretty good choice for this artificer adaptation.

 

[Ark the Pie King]

Yeah I'm actually going to be playing a Feral Winged Tiefling Artificer soon, level 8. Going Alchemist because the more I look at them, the more I think Alchemist is ultimately the stronger build. Artillerist is just too strapped for spell slots. Having to summon the turret and spent spell slots over and over really hurts it, and even though individually the turrets are stronger than the homunculus, the homunculus is a lot more versatile in what it can do turn to turn. Once you summon a turret, that's it. That's all the benefit you get from it. Plus the homunculus can act as a scout, and has the almighty help action.

 

[Sillvva]

If you could create the turret as a bonus action and fire it in the same turn, I could see playing an artillerist. However, for a role such as an artillerist, spending my first 1-2 turns setting up a weak turret doesn't seem like the best thing I could be doing with my turns. It would be more productive to just forget the turret ability during combat altogether and do something else like crossbow expert with Arcane Weapon enhanced damage or casting Fireball.

 

[ohsohologramic]

So discussing this with one of my players who has an artificer, Alchemical Mastery shouldn't be able to trigger on Arcane Weapon (poison) because Arcane Weapon doesn't require material components, so you could not use a spell focus to cast it.

 

[ContrapuntalAnt]

So discussing this with one of my players who has an artificer, Alchemical Mastery shouldn't be able to trigger on Arcane Weapon (poison) because Arcane Weapon doesn't require material components, so you could not use a spell focus to cast it.

Unusually, the Artificer uses a spellcasting focus for every spell - whether or not it requires material components. See the "Tools Required" paragraph of Spellcasting in the UA class. Alchemical Mastery can therefore trigger on spells without material components.

 

[Patrick Boden]

So looking at the tool required section and that last sentence about the infused items, I assume having your armour infused would not count, as it is not "in hand". but enchanting a shield would much like a cleric.

 

[ContrapuntalAnt]

So looking at the tool required section and that last sentence about the infused items, I assume having your armour infused would not count, as it is not "in hand". but enchanting a shield would much like a cleric.

I agree with your reading of it, at least RAW. I'm not sure whether or not that was an intended consequence, but it quite probably was.