Looking at your table, it's clear that an artificer can potentially get a lot of casts of low-level spells. It makes this aspect of the class much more like a sorcerer than a wizard...which doesn't feel quite right. And yet I like the basic idea of devices that can fizzle.UPDATE: I updated my table above, which now includes average spell slots. Further, I have withdrawn my initial analysis, as there was a major mistake in my understanding of the class that lead to an erroneous review.
I don't think going back to the o5e spell casting way is a good idea. If you think the class is too limmited with their selection of spells then an ability that allows them to reconfigure a device on a short rest, or the ability to destroy one of their devices to reproduce any of the artificer spells they are capable of casting.As much fun as the fizzle mechanic is, it means that the Artificer sacrifices flexibility for more spell slots, which I think goes somewhat against the goal of the class. The Artificer, to me, is a maverick who is somewhat ready for any situation.
Wow I had started doing the math but looking at those number, they don't need to reroll 1s, and I don't even know if they need the die type to increase.For ease
I don't think they should be compared to a sorcerer or wizard (even though I did earlier) in terms of spell power. I think they should be compared to a warlock. In general, they seem to have a few spells less than the warlock does--but unlike the warlock (but like the cleric), they appear to have access to their entire spell list and can switch out daily, rather than changing one spell each time they go up a level. And, of course, there's a good chance they can cast each spell multiple times without fizzling out or having to take a short rest.As much fun as the fizzle mechanic is, it means that the Artificer sacrifices flexibility for more spell slots, which I think goes somewhat against the goal of the class. The Artificer, to me, is a maverick who is somewhat ready for any situation. Keeping them as a prepared spellcaster helps with this, but the fact that they only get to prepare a very small number of spells every day makes them somewhat limited in terms of utility. In short, I want an Artificer who feels more like a Rogue and less like a Sorcerer.
I updated the math once again. I was using approximate calculations for the spell slots before as I figured they would be sufficient for this simple analysis, but I realized that at the very low %s it was actually pretty inaccurate. So this time I used true geometric series (this is actually a very simple series with a very easy solution, I feel silly for not doing it earlier it was actually easier to do than the approximation).Wow I had started doing the math but looking at those number, they don't need to reroll 1s, and I don't even know if they need the die type to increase.
To add to this, here an expanded table of basically the same concept. Each box shows the likelihood of fizzling after rolling X many timesFor ease of discussion, here are the failure chances for the various fizzle die and spell levels.
UPDATE: I have now added the average number of castings you would get for a spell of that level per day per spell invention.
% Chance (average spell slots per spell invention of that level)
d4
1 - 25% (3.83)
2 - 50% (2)
3 - 75% (1.33)
d6
1 - 16.7% (5.2)
2 - 33.3% (3)
3 - 50% (2)
4 - 66.7% (1.5)
5 - 83.3% (1.2)
d6 (reroll)
1 - 2.8% (9.6)
2 - 22.2% (4.2)
3 - 41.7% (2.4)
4 - 61.1% (1.6)
5 - 80.6% (1.24)
d8 (reroll)
1 - 1.6% (10.2)
2 - 15.6% (5.4)
3 - 29.7% (3.3)
4 - 43.8% (2.3)
5 - 57.8% (1.7)
d10 (reroll)
1 - 1% (10.5)
2- 12% (6.3)
3 - 23% (4.1)
4 - 34% (2.9)
5 - 45% (2.2)
d4 | Times used | ||||
Levels 1-9 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1 | 25.00% | 43.75% | 57.81% | 68.36% | 76.27% |
2 | 50.00% | 75.00% | 87.50% | 93.75% | 96.88% |
3 | 75.00% | 93.75% | 98.44% | 99.61% | 99.90% |
d6 | times used | ||||
Level 10 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1 | 16.67% | 30.56% | 42.13% | 51.77% | 59.81% |
2 | 33.33% | 55.56% | 70.37% | 80.25% | 86.83% |
3 | 50.00% | 75.00% | 87.50% | 93.75% | 96.88% |
4 | 66.67% | 88.89% | 96.30% | 98.77% | 99.59% |
5 | 83.33% | 97.22% | 99.54% | 99.92% | 99.99% |
d6 (reroll) | Times used | ||||
Level 10 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1 | 2.78% | 5.48% | 8.10% | 10.66% | 13.14% |
2 | 22.22% | 39.51% | 52.95% | 63.40% | 71.54% |
3 | 41.67% | 65.97% | 80.15% | 88.42% | 93.25% |
4 | 61.11% | 84.88% | 94.12% | 97.71% | 99.11% |
5 | 80.56% | 96.22% | 99.26% | 99.86% | 99.97% |
d8 (reroll) | Times Used | ||||
Level 20 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1 | 1.56% | 3.10% | 4.61% | 6.11% | 7.57% |
2 | 15.63% | 28.81% | 39.93% | 49.32% | 57.24% |
3 | 29.69% | 50.56% | 65.24% | 75.56% | 82.81% |
4 | 43.75% | 68.36% | 82.20% | 89.99% | 94.37% |
5 | 57.81% | 82.20% | 92.49% | 96.83% | 98.66% |
d10 (reroll) | Times Used | ||||
Special | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
1 | 1.00% | 1.99% | 2.97% | 3.94% | 4.90% |
2 | 12.00% | 22.56% | 31.85% | 40.03% | 47.23% |
3 | 23.00% | 40.71% | 54.35% | 64.85% | 72.93% |
4 | 34.00% | 56.44% | 71.25% | 81.03% | 87.48% |
5 | 45.00% | 69.75% | 83.36% | 90.85% | 94.97% |
Could someone explain why they think this? The O5E artificer has the following total number of spells prepared assuming point buy and maxing int ASAP:Magical Buff Class
My biggest issue is the number of prepared spells. It just feels so low compared to other classes.
Level | O5E | A5E |
3 | 6 | 4 |
5 | 10 | 7 |
10 | 16 | 10 |
14 | 20 | 13 |