Unearthed Arcana New Unearthed Arcana: Revised Artificer

The Artificer Returns, and it's a better Beast Master than the Beast Master

ICYMI, enjoy! It's got two new subclasses, new spells, and some tweaks to multiclassing. Plus, you know, typos.

Now to the meat of the matter. The Battle Smith. Everyone's better at having pets than the poor Beast Master Ranger. Discuss!

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Archivist! Now, everyone can play with your invisible friend! Totally a psionic class that didn't make it into the psionic playtest.

I definitely think it's a psionic subclass, as the revised Psion was being discussed they were certainly ideas discussed for psionic subclasses in other classes, like Soulknives in Monk and Psychic Warrior in Fighter.

 

[tglassy]

Well, a 17th's level Artificer would have 7 Infusions and 5 infused items, which is basically 5 guaranteed magical items of all kinds of utility from combat to exploration to whatever you can think of. They have 4 cantrips and can switch out their cantrips every short or long rest, something no other caster can do. They also have 14 spell slots going up to lvl 5, with a good selection from what I can see, and they prepare them from the list and "know" their entire list. And that doesn't include the guaranteed list of spells for each subclass, which steer the class towards different specializations.

Compare that to a lvl 17 Wizard, with 19 spell slots that go up to lvl 9, and their School features. They both can prepare the same number of spells, though Wizards need to learn them and Artificers know them all. If you just compare base class abilities and not the subclass stuff, the Wizard only has 1 extra 5th lvl spell slot than the Artificer, though the Wizard gets it much sooner and at lvl 17 has their 9th lvl spell slot as well.

So, eliminating similarities, at lvl 17, the Wizard has one slot each of 5th through 9th spells, and the Artificer has 5 guaranteed, permanent magical items that he can switch out (can know 7), with things as powerful as a Belt of Hill Giant Strength and a Headband of Intellect, thus fixing stat problems for either himself or a party member, can switch out his cantrips, and can attack twice. And the Artificer can give those items to party members. Oh, and the Artificer has more health and can use medium armor and shields. And that's without factoring in the Subclass skills, each of which includes a "Pet" of some kind.

Personally, I'm enjoying this version very, very much. One of the first character concepts I had was a person who has no magical ability but understood the theory of magic so well that he learned how to develop magical items, but the only way I found to do that in 5e was with a Rogue Thief with the Use Magic Device ability. I loved that character, but this is exactly what I'd been looking for. He'd be great Solo, with a trick for every occasion, but in a party he shines as he can provide ultimate support: Permanent Magical Items until they get something better. Who WOULDN'T want one of these guys in their group?

 

[DEFCON 1]

Seems like they may have forgotten that bard (or magic initiate, if artificer is allowed like it should be) can snag this for non-artificers.

Yeah, but the bard wouldn't get it until 6th level, which is a level past when casters classes would already have access to Elemental Weapon. And other than variant humans, Magic Initiates won't come into play until a level right before.

So I don't see this spell being a 1st spell for Artificers to be any huge bump for them over those who might cast Elemental Weapon. Good? Sure. Overpowered? Not when you compare it to other personal damage-increasing spells for melee attacks at 1st level like Hex, Hunter's Mark etc. But maybe that's just me.

 

[trentonjoe]

The better comparisons are Hex and Hunter's Mark, both of which are first level spells. They're all variations on a specific effect.

It's actually way better (maybe not way) than hex and hunters mark because:

1. You never need to use a bonus action to switch targets
2. ALL the weapon damage is magical, not just the d6.
3. You can take advantage of creaturess with vulnerabilites.

 

[trentonjoe]

Good? Sure. Overpowered? Not when you compare it to other personal damage-increasing spells for melee attacks at 1st level like Hex, Hunter's Mark etc. But maybe that's just me.

I mean , the flip side is that Elemental Weapon isn't exactly a "must have" 3rd level spell.....

 

[Al2O3]

With the Crossbow Expert feat entrenched in the Player's Handbook, the hand crossbow is already far superior to other bows.

It takes too long to get the crossbow expert feat after first getting sharpshooter, and with the playstyle my DM prefers the limitless supply of arrows or bolts is a very relevant benefit.

 

[Kurotowa]

It's actually way better (maybe not way) than hex and hunters mark because:

1. You never need to use a bonus action to switch targets
2. ALL the weapon damage is magical, not just the d6.
3. You can take advantage of creaturess with vulnerabilites.

1 is a concession to how much the Artificer's Bonus Action is already in demand. 2 is just the usual "counts as magic weapon" clause which is mostly there to trigger Arcane Armament. I don't think either is a particularly big deal. 3 is true, for as valuable as a d6 or two of vulnerable damage is worth. But Hex inflicts disadvantage to a save type and Hunter's Mark improves your ability to tract the target, so they each have their own strong points.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Seems like they may have forgotten that bard (or magic initiate, if artificer is allowed like it should be) can snag this for non-artificers.

RAW Magic Initiate only applies to "full caster" classes (paladin and ranger spells are excluded), so I wouldn't extend it to cover half-caster artificers.

 

[trentonjoe]

1 is a concession to how much the Artificer's Bonus Action is already in demand. 2 is just the usual "counts as magic weapon" clause which is mostly there to trigger Arcane Armament. I don't think either is a particularly big deal. 3 is true, for as valuable as a d6 or two of vulnerable damage is worth. But Hex inflicts disadvantage to a save type and Hunter's Mark improves your ability to tract the target, so they each have their own strong points.

I see your point on three, that seems pretty reasonable as a trade off.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

RAW Magic Initiate only applies to "full caster" classes (paladin and ranger spells are excluded), so I wouldn't extend it to cover half-caster artificers.

Since artificers have cantrips (unlike rangers and paladins), I wouldn't be surprised if they errata'd artificer into the feat when the "for publication" version comes out. Of course, if they had said rangers and paladins get exactly two cantrips (spare the dying and true strike) [I didn't say they got two good ones, but both seem reasonable for rangers and paladins to have], they could have made the feat work for all casting classes.