D&D 5E Proficiencies don't make the class. Do they?

[Staffan]

If you want to abandon the spellbook as a way to achieve that, that's fine, but what would you replace it with? Because a 3e-style "static list of known spells" doesn't translate well into a character who always has just the right tool for the job.

I turned spell-storing item into a class feature that let them create a one-shot item that casts any spell by taking a minute and expending a spell slot 1 higher than the spell in question.

I also modeled their expertise with magic items by giving them:

* Infuse item: They don't need to worry about spell prereqs for making items.

* Use Magic Device at 3rd level.

* At 6th level, if they're attuned to a self-recharging item (e.g. wand), they get to roll twice for recharge and take the better.

* Also at 6th level, they get the equivalent of the Divine Strike ability from many domains, but can change element on a short rest.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Another way of perhaps putting my argument - why is the below character not an artificer? What do they lack that they would need to be a real artificer?

[sblock]
Str 14
Dex 10
Con 16
Int 15
Wis 13
Cha 08
Proficiencies:
(weapon) Battleaxe, Handaxe, Throwing Hammer, Warhammer, Dagger, Dart, Sling, Quarterstaff, Light Crossbow
(armor) light armor, medium armor
(skills) Arcana, History, Investigation,Perception
(tools) Artisan's Tools, Thieves' Tools
Class Features (Apprentice Tier):
Infusions
Each day, you can prepare a number of infusions from your list of known infusions equal to your Intelligence Modifier + your class level. Using an infusion follows the same rules as casting a spell in general. Your Intelligence score is your spellcasting ability score for your infusions. When you use an infusion, you must target an object. If the spell normally targets a creature, you can target an object the creature is wearing, and if the spell normally fills an area or creates an effect, your infusion causes the object to produce the area or effect at the indicated range. If the spell normally targets the caster, you can use it on an object you possess, but the object loses its infusion if removed from you.

At 1st-level, you know 6 1st-level infusions of your choice, and you can use 2 infusions every day.

The infusions this character knows are alarm^ (usually infused into a small bell), comprehend languages^ (usually infused into an ear-horn), grease* (usually infused into a vial of actual grease), mage armor* (usually infused into a small amulet), thunderwave (usually infused into a music box), and unseen servant^ (usually infused into a small automated chlid's toy). Infusions marked with a * are typically prepared.

Easy Infusions
You have three easy infusions that you know and can use without spending one of your daily infusion uses on. These infusions for this character are acid splash, mending, and shocking grasp

Complex Infusions
Some infusions have the complex tag. Those that do can be infused into an item following the rules for casting the spell as a ritual as long as you know the infusion (even if you do not have it prepared). The complex infusions are marked above with a ^.

Salvage
Once per day when you finish a short rest, you can recover a number of infusions whose combined level is equal to or less than your class level (rounded up), and you cannot recover an infusion of 6th level or higher.

Always the Right Tool
Starting at 2nd level, you can use your action to jury-rig some inanimate object from whatever you have on hand. The object you create can be no larger than 3 feet on a side and weigh no more than 10 pounds, and you must be familiar with the actual form of the object you're replicating (such as by having seen it). The object is visibly fragile, held together with hope and dreams and a little artificer elbow-grease. The object falls apart after 1 hour, or if it takes any damage. You can use this feature again by disassembling the object.

Item Creation
At 3rd level, you can create common or uncommon magic items. A common item costs 100 gp to create and an uncommon item costs 500 gp to create. You must know the formula for creating these items to create them.
[/sblock]

 

[Mephista]

Personally, what I really think would be fun, is to have at least half the classes get artificer style subclasses. The chances of me pulling off a party of all artificers is small, but getting an artificer-styled wizard, bard, fighter, and rogue all in the same party? That could happen.

Wizard could be the golemancer. Bard could do the magic crossbow/gun style. Rogue to the alchemist / poisoner. Fighter could be a gadgeteer! Could be fun!

 

[I'm A Banana]

I turned spell-storing item into a class feature that let them create a one-shot item that casts any spell by taking a minute and expending a spell slot 1 higher than the spell in question.

...I'm not familiar with "spell-storing item" from the 3e or the 4e artificer. From the sounds of it, though, the intent of the feature seems to be "the artificer can use spells outside of combat." Putting aside more specific design considerations, what's the conceptual difference between this and Ritual Caster? Ritual caster is what most classes (including the wizard!) use to access a variety of spells outside of combat.

This sounds pretty substantial (as Ritual caster is), but I don't know that it isn't basically doing the same thing.

And it doesn't seem like a good replacement for a spellbook, because it doesn't actually describe the spells that an artificer "knows" or can prepare. Unless the intent is to allow them to know and prepare every spell in the game? I'd hope the issues with that would be pretty self-evident.

* Infuse item: They don't need to worry about spell prereqs for making items.
* Use Magic Device at 3rd level.
* At 6th level, if they're attuned to a self-recharging item (e.g. wand), they get to roll twice for recharge and take the better.

Curious, but largely cosmetic...

* Also at 6th level, they get the equivalent of the Divine Strike ability from many domains, but can change element on a short rest.

What was wrong with the elemental weapon spell?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Why is a fighter/druid with the explorer background not a ranger? I mean, he wanders the woods, fights and casts a few spells. Why is ranger class needed?

The answer is because you played one when you were 10, so you don't question the need for it. Favored enemy is basically fluff at this point, primieval awareness is a bad 1st level spell disguised as a class feature, and natural explorer is something you should be able to do as part of the skill or at most as a feat. None of those are any more deserving of a specific class than an artificer.

Your artificer is an artificer in the same way making a wizard with medium armor proficiency and heals is a cleric. It technically fits a weak description, but IMO is too trivially different than the wizard to even bother publishing or messing with. This falls into the bloat for bloat's sake that I see in Pathfinder, where every month there's a new glut of garbage feats like Acrobatic Pancake Maker that add a +2 to a skill and a +1 competence bonus to Arglebargle under stupid condition Y. I am with you in that a class should have a mechanical hook, I just think that people have provided one for the Artificer. You seem to just be dismissing it as entirely proficiency related, or unworthy of a place.

IMO, the key things it lacks is the ability to "weapon up", because merely having access to a hammer/crossbow isn't enough when you have no real reason to use them. It lacks the option to focus on building a guardian construct. It cannot pass out its abilities to other characters. It is subject to the same concentration mechanic as every other spellcaster (which doesnt make as much sense for a guy with a jetpack and a cloaking device). This might be a neat place to explore ways to break that in a way that I'd be wary of with a full 9 level caster.

There is design space to be explored still. I'd rather see a psion more as the equivalent of a superhero, who doesn't use level 1-whatever spells and instead picks power trees instead of being watered down as 3 sorcerer subclass features.

 

[Shasarak]

The issue is not justifying the idea of a artificer, warlord, or psion.

Its making them significantly different from the wizard, fight, and wizard again respectively.

I think it would be easy for a good designer to make those classes significantly different.

 

[Minigiant]

[MENTION=31506]ehren37[/MENTION]
the ranger is a class because a fighter/druid doesnt have a exploration and a combat boost and a ranger doesn't wild shape. A 5e fighter/druid sucks at ranger stuff. The fighter/druid could have replaced the ranger but it wasn't built that way. And it would have weakened the fighter and druid just to do it.

A class must be built. And built to matter and be different.


---
To others
It is all about mechanics.

I could build a dancer class use starts a Dance of Battle and gain Momentum points each turn and when it hits. It could spend Momentum points to deal bonus damage or defend against attacks.
5e doesn't have a "build up your power" class. There is a history of blade dancers, acrobatic duelist, and mage dancers. Case for the class made.

I could ribive the truenamer. Let it do spells art will but have to make abilty checks first.
There's no ability check for attacks class. The fluff is 3e. Class case made.

20 levels of unique Fluff and Mechanics is all you need

 

[Mephista]

Why is a fighter/druid with the explorer background not a ranger? I mean, he wanders the woods, fights and casts a few spells. Why is ranger class needed?

The answer is because

The developers found mechanical niche for it that no other class has. They specialize in information about other creatures in a way no one else does. They can heal, they have "bow smites" for lack of a better term, they can sense their surroundings and track people in an area by literal magic.

The mechanics are what matter here, not the flavor. It doesn't matter how similar the flavor is to something, what matters is the unique mechanics that no one else does. You might not like them, but they are there. There are a lot of classes that deal with the nature vibe, and we can argue all of them are "part druid." However, each of those classes are filled with unique mechanics for different play styles.

You want the artificer to be a unique class? Don't trash other classes, start suggesting enough unique mechanics to fill a class.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I have, you've just been sticking your fingers in your ears... eyes? I dunno, whatever. They've been willfully ignored by those who arbitrarily decided the class shouldn't exist. My point wasnt to trash the ranger, but to show how the same criteria could be applied to ANY class outside of a 2 class system (caster/non-caster) to show it doesn't deserve to be fleshed out mechanically.

 

[Staffan]

...I'm not familiar with "spell-storing item" from the 3e or the 4e artificer.

SSI is a 3e artificer spell (well, infusion) that lets you create a one-shot wand (though not necessarily wand-shaped) of any spell with spell level equal to half your level or lower, at a small XP cost. The casting time was 1 minute, but could be dropped to 1 round by spending an action point (a resource that refreshed when gaining levels).

The intent was that while the artificer's own spell list was mostly buff-oriented, they could also MacGyver up a solution to pretty much any non-combat problem.

From the sounds of it, though, the intent of the feature seems to be "the artificer can use spells outside of combat." Putting aside more specific design considerations, what's the conceptual difference between this and Ritual Caster? Ritual caster is what most classes (including the wizard!) use to access a variety of spells outside of combat.

Ritual Caster is limited to the spells normally available to the character. Spell-storing item lets you go beyond that - the artificer can make a spell-storing item of pass without trace, control water, dimension door, or tongues. In 3e it was balanced by an XP cost, I'm instead balancing it by requiring a higher-level spell slot.

And it doesn't seem like a good replacement for a spellbook, because it doesn't actually describe the spells that an artificer "knows" or can prepare. Unless the intent is to allow them to know and prepare every spell in the game? I'd hope the issues with that would be pretty self-evident.

My artificer has all the spells on his class list as spells known. It is a rather small and single-minded spell list, however (and I couldn't figure out any 8th or 9th level spells that belonged on it).

What was wrong with the elemental weapon spell?

At 6th level, bards either gain Additional Magical Secrets or Extra Attack. Since my class is based on the bard, it should have something at that level, and I figured that elemental damage was both flavorful and a good alternative to Extra Attack (slightly lower-powered, but on the other hand many of the artificer's other features are better than the bard's).