Reviewing the Artificer

[Zinegata]

As-is, the Artificer isn't really very good. I wouldn't buy a book for an Artificer.

Main reasons are as follows:

1) Too many similarities with existing base classes (if it basically does something fairly similar to a Cleric, why not just play a Cleric and replace all Radiant attacks with an arcane version?)

2) Half Zone, Half Creature Artifices aren't really very good design, when most Artifices last till the end of your next turn. If they stayed around for a while, then it might be worth tracking HP for them, but as it stands they'll be gone even before they're damaged.

3) Mixing implements and weapon use is very clunky. Aside from a dagger and a javelin, you CANNOT be wielding a ranged weapon and an arcane implement at the same time. So unless your Artificer likes juggling, you'll have to stick to something like a knife and wand combination to be able to use all Artificer powers (and I suspect most players would prefer Artificer wielding Xbows - to further align the Artificer towards its mechanical flavor).

The ability to recharge items would be fairly nice though - albeit potentially game-breaking, so I'm on the fence on that one.

So as it stands, it's not really worth it.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Well, I do take your point that aside from the Infusion their healing options are limited. I just like their healing powers so much better than the Infusion...

I agree that the healing powers they have are much more interesting and thematic than their class feature.

And I do maintain that strong defenses are as good for a party as more HP. 4E has shied away from allowing players massive AC bonuses or resistances for the most part, so this could be the artificer's niche as long as the ability is sufficiently restricted.

Absolutely, and it is, the current set up does seem to be Warlords give extra actions, Clerics give healing, Artificers give buffs. However it should be remembered that eventually your allies will fall unconsious, at which point all the AC and temp hp in the world won't get them back on their feet, and not being able to bring allies back from unconsiousness with a minor action would arguably make the Artificer not a Leader with Controller abilities, but a Controller with Leader abilities, or at the very least a Hybrid class.

And I have trouble swallowing the divine "attack an enemy and heal an ally" powers too. The artificer has "attack an enemy and buff an ally", which is no better. I'd say that while about a third of the powers they've shown us make me shudder for this precise reason. On the other hand, the other powers make me feel really good about the direction the class is going.

I quite like abilities like Fiery Infusion, Spike Wire and Runic Resistance, and while I agree that spells like Thunder Armour and Shielding Cube could be better, at least they make an attempt to thematically tie the effects together in a way that Healing Strike or Paladin's Judgement don't bother.

 

[Novem5er]

Okay, I'll be honest. The Artificer: I don't get it.

I really want to like this class. I've read several of the Eberron novels with artificer characters and I always like them. I'm understand that game mechanics cannot always reflect literature, and that balance and fun are primary concerns when designing any system. So far I love 4e, so no complaints there.

But this preview article? I just don't get that artificer feel. I was really curious how WotC was going to design it and, with this build at least, I'm just not feeling it. I've come here for help b/c I really want to like this class.

My big problem is that it doesn't feel like the artificer is actually "making" anything. It seems like you're pointing a wand and making stuff happen... sort of like a wizard, except that often an ally has to be a target, as opposed to an enemy.

Take the Thundering Armor At-Will ability. It has a range of 10, and can be done every round. The description says that you point your wand and make your ally's armor pulse. Just point and enchant?

Many of the other spells involve firing an infused projectile. I guess that the act of using the power is what actually creates the infusion. This makes sense, except that obviously the infusion has to be used right away and can't be passed to someone else.

Just taking a look at Healing Infusion, Restorative Infusion, and Altered Luck, it again appears that the artificer is throwing enchantments around. Altered Luck specifically states that you channel a pattern of energy into an ally's equipment... from a range of 10, but you don't actually have to have an ally to cast it.

So I guess I dig the crossbow bolts of infused-doom, but I'm really not getting the bippity-boppity-boo of enchanting things from a distance and levitating curative compounds through the air.

It just feels like they only put in infusions as flavor... and no real mechanic. Take "Slick Concoction" for example. "You direct magic-infused liquid under an ally's boots, causing her to slip forward".

a) the liquid isn't infused until you use the power (aka, you can't give it to someone else.
b) you don't have to apply the liquid to anything, it just magically appears under someone's boots.

To me, this power could have easily been written for any number of classes with the same effect. The Warlord gives a shout that inspires a sudden burst of speed. The Warlock levitates an ally into position. The Wizard conjures a magic boot that kicks the ally in her rear.

Again, I understand game balance. It probably isn't fun for an artificer to waste an action infusing something, then another action to run over and apply it to a character's boots. It probably is unbalanced for the artificer to create something ahead of time and pass it around to the whole party to use. Still, I'm getting nervous now about 4e b/c of this article. It seems they are blatantly changing the flavor of a class to suit the needs of the game mechanics, instead of creating balanced mechanics that match the flavor of the class.

I haven't had a complaint until now

 

[WhatGravitas]

It seems they are blatantly changing the flavor of a class to suit the needs of the game mechanics, instead of creating balanced mechanics that match the flavor of the class.

Well, it's still a playtest document... so things can change. I think the class should, as a rule, only get these new-fangled "short rest" dailies.

Some classes seem to have the theme that the dailies are something "special" - spellbook, the reliable keyword.

If the artificer has only short rest dailies, he basically sacrifices his dailies to create infused items, i.e. his theme would be "passing around the dailies".

I think that's a balanced concept, and the concern that it robs the artificer of his daily spotlights is a non-issue, because the player still gloats "that was MY infusion, man!", and because it's something that people playing an artificer enjoy.

Then keep their encounters as short-lived, artifice flavoured effects, and the at-wills like they are now.

This should result in a artificer fitting the current power structure, but he still has the "building something beforehand" thing down.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Khaalis]

Just a few quick late comments. I saw some people mentioning that it was a bad thing for the Artificer to have controller aspects. I personally think that is EXACTLY the way they should go. With only one controller option, having a class with a strong secondary roll of controller is a good thing. I would love to see the class get more into the 'inventor'/'gadgeteer' role, especially allowing them to use items in a fashion similar to the Kobold Slingers. Less about direct damage and more about control, and definately more about boosting allies' powers.

 

[fuindordm]

If the artificer has only short rest dailies, he basically sacrifices his dailies to create infused items, i.e. his theme would be "passing around the dailies".

I think that's a balanced concept, and the concern that it robs the artificer of his daily spotlights is a non-issue, because the player still gloats "that was MY infusion, man!", and because it's something that people playing an artificer enjoy.

I like this idea.

And the artificer can always use those dailies himself. In 3E parlance, sometimes it makes sense to give the bane weapon to your best fighter--but sometimes you can afford to use it yourself.

 

[small pumpkin man]

I agree that the Artificer could do with some more short rest dailys (considering there really aren't that many), actually having some short rest attack spells would be cool, allthough like Fighters and Reliable, I don't think it should be universal.

 

[Sashi]

The healing word/inspiring word formula is growing tiresome, and the alchemical flavor of "healing infusion" feels forced. Must all artificers fling magic tea at their allies to keep them alive? I much prefer the Regeneration Infusion, Healing Figurine and Hero's Elixir.

I agree that it's forced. But I think it's a design decision: all leader classes will have exactly the same "healing word" ability as their base healing ability. Just the way all defender classes will be able to mark their target.

 

[fuindordm]

I agree that it's forced. But I think it's a design decision: all leader classes will have exactly the same "healing word" ability as their base healing ability. Just the way all defender classes will be able to mark their target.

And yet the three defenders (fighter, paladin, swordmage via origins) have very different and distinctive marking abilities. One is obviously non-magical and works well against many enemies, one is obviously magical and works best against a single champion...

Furthermore, if we just copy and paste the "necessary" abilities from one leader class to the next, we severely dilute the concept of power sources. If every leader gets ranged healing, what's so special about divine magic?

This conversation just made me notice something: the cleric and warlord powers don't require their target to be conscious!

From PH p.293: "When a power heals you, you don't have to take an action to spend a healing surge. Even if you're unconscious, the power uses your healing surge and restores hit points."

Hmm... so how does Inspiring Word work on an unconscious character?

The rules should always serve the fluff, even if it complicates things slightly. If there is one think I dislike about any edition, it's when fluff is slapped on to a rule without concern for verisimilitude.

I have no problem with hit points representing morale in almost all cases. I have no problem with divine magic slapping awake an unconscious character. Divine characters should have better, more reliable healing than other characters and divine leaders should have the best healing of all.

But to preserve the distinctive flavor of the power sources, Martial characters should not be able to restore HP (=morale) to the unconscious, and Arcane characters should not be tossing around pure healing at range.

And in particular I would say that ranged buffs, with or without a healing rider, are very out of character for the artificer. They should be used sparingly.

Ben

 

[Vendark]

Hmm... so how does Inspiring Word work on an unconscious character?

Unconscious doesn't mean "in a coma." Unconscious people can be roused, and the Warlord is commanding enough to do it with the power of his voice.

But to preserve the distinctive flavor of the power sources, Martial characters should not be able to restore HP (=morale) to the unconscious, and Arcane characters should not be tossing around pure healing at range.

I don't see why not. These seem like arbitrary declarations.