Gunslinging Artificer

[szilard]

So... I'm going to begin playing in an Eberron campaign. Play begins at first level, and will probably run up to about 12th. Firearms are more common and are as per the DMG with the following exceptions: Martial weapons, Crit 20/x4, and crossbow feats have firearm equivalents (rapid reload makes reloading a firearm a swift action).

I'd like to play a gunslinging artificer. The idea is appealing, and some of the tricks I'd be able to pull off (giving guns the bane enhancement on the fly, spell-storing guns that shoot Scorching Rays, building guns that hold wands in them, etc.) are pretty cool.

The problem? Guns are martial weapons (in this campaign). Artificers aren't proficient with them.

Should I start out with a single level of Ranger in order to get proficiency? It wouldn't hurt my character concept, really, but would it hurt my artificer advancement too much? I could spend a feat for proficiency, but feats are precious...

I've never played an artificer before (or seen one in play for that matter), so tips are welcome as well.

-Stuart

 

[UltimaGabe]

So... I'm going to begin playing in an Eberron campaign. Play begins at first level, and will probably run up to about 12th. Firearms are more common and are as per the DMG with the following exceptions: Martial weapons, Crit 20/x4, and crossbow feats have firearm equivalents (rapid reload makes reloading a firearm a swift action).

I'd like to play a gunslinging artificer. The idea is appealing, and some of the tricks I'd be able to pull off (giving guns the bane enhancement on the fly, spell-storing guns that shoot Scorching Rays, building guns that hold wands in them, etc.) are pretty cool.

The problem? Guns are martial weapons (in this campaign). Artificers aren't proficient with them.

Should I start out with a single level of Ranger in order to get proficiency? It wouldn't hurt my character concept, really, but would it hurt my artificer advancement too much? I could spend a feat for proficiency, but feats are precious...

I've never played an artificer before (or seen one in play for that matter), so tips are welcome as well.

-Stuart

Well, considering how powerful they can be (especially with that x4 crit) I'd be inclined to tell you to use a feat on it. After all, if it's an integral part of your character, there's no reason to whine about having to pay for it. Even if it's just a roleplaying aspect of your character, the cost will make you appreciate it that much more.

That being said, you could always talk with your DM about changing some of your proficiencies. You could, for example, give up most of your proficiencies (limiting you to only the weapons that Wizards can equip), in exchange for also being proficient with a firearm.

 

[the_mighty_agrippa]

I would make them exotic weapons and then spend the feat slot to get the necessary proficiency.

 

[szilard]

I would make them exotic weapons and then spend the feat slot to get the necessary proficiency.

They aren't exotic weapons in this campaign. The DM wants them to be fairly common and an attractive weapon choice.

-Stuart

 

[Sejs]

You could always just take Martial Weapon Proficiency (Firearms) as a feat.

Not as costly as taking a level of ranger, with regard to your artificer-ing.

 

[szilard]

You could always just take Martial Weapon Proficiency (Firearms) as a feat.

Not as costly as taking a level of ranger, with regard to your artificer-ing.

That's the debate. I'm asking how much the cost would be. I don't think it would be worth it with a normal spellcasting class, but I'm not sure how much the level of ranger would hurt, artificer-ing-wise. The boosts to saves, skill points, bab, etc are tempting, but would they be worth the cost?

-Stuart

 

[Aaron L]

The Artificer I just made has a Warforged Graft arm with a Wand Sheath. He keeps a wand of Lightning Bolt in it. The wand is mounted on the back of his forearm like some kind of magic cannon. It's an arm mounted magitech particle gun.

Boy is that guy gonna be fun to play. I'd never really looked at Artificers before, but man, do they rawk. I'm glad my DM recommended I check them out.

 

[iceifur]

That's the debate. I'm asking how much the cost would be. I don't think it would be worth it with a normal spellcasting class, but I'm not sure how much the level of ranger would hurt, artificer-ing-wise. The boosts to saves, skill points, bab, etc are tempting, but would they be worth the cost?

It's a tough call. The main problem is, if you begin with ranger, you don't have your main artificer-essential skills as class skills at 1st level -- you'll be left to pick up the ranks at a later time (a pain when you have to play through the interim).

You could see if your DM will let you exchange the artificer's Medium Armor Proficiency for Martial Weapon Proficiency (Firearms). It's essentially just a bonus feat swap, and it even fits the idea of a run-and-gun artificer better, anyway (light armor and pistols FTW).

 

[Sidekick]

Stick with Artificer at 1st level. If you're going to be a human you've got two feats to play with, one for Martial weapon prof (firearms) and the other I'd reccommend be Point Blank Shot.

The level in ranger will very much hold you back, far more than burning a feat into what is a core part of your concept.

Happy gaming