Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Introduces The Artifcer

I don't think anyone saw this coming!

 

[Flamestrike]

I want the pet moved to a subclass (and to scale a bit better) personally.

 

[Jester David]

Honestly, the best way for WotC to do this is to simply say "you create a 2-handed ranged weapon, which can take the form of a wand, staff, crossbow, or firearm..." and let the players and DMs fluff it however they want, as long as the mechanics stay the same...

But if they did that, people would have gone "meh" and looked less closely at the class. They want a strong reaction for the most feedback. That might be the difference between someone filling out the survey and skipping a week.
If, after introducing guns, the majority of fans is "cool, I love it!" they can feel safe including that as an option in the flavor. If the majority reply with "the thought of guns made me throw up a little in my mouth" they can tweak the flavor to emphasize it being a rod or magical device.

 

[MechaPilot]

I want the pet moved to a subclass (and to scale a bit better) personally.

Would you mind it in the base class if it was a mount? It would be very easy to limit the choices to creatures usable as mounts.

 

[GobiWon]

Overall I am pretty happy with this interpretation. It feels like an Artificer. I think some of the subclass features needs a bit of wordsmithing to clarify how often they can be used. I hope this means we can expect to see Eberron content soon; even simply opening the setting to the DMs Guild use would work (especially if Keith Baker puts some content out).


I thought he same thing. It could be easily fixed by adding Find Familiar to their spell list (or giving it as a free ritual) and specifying the familiar is a mechanical version of the animal.

Perhaps they meant large or smaller?

 

[Xeviat]

Sorry, that doesn't fly. They already have feedback on non-scaling pets. There was so much backlash that they redid a PHB class, whihc they really really really were trying to avoid according to a lot of what they put out.

So NO, it doesn't get a free pass of "They intentionally went against two years of feedback and an admitted mistake 'just to see' if perhaps people changed their mind". That's insane.

The mechanical pet is really just the paladin's Steed spell, just permanent and non-summonable. It looks like it's meant to be a mount or a familiar, though it getting to make melee attacks does throw that under the bus.

If this gets scaling, then I want to be able to fortify my familiar by using a higher level spell slot to summon them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

Well, um... They get an A for effort?

It's an interesting class, and one I would play, but if it's an attempt to replicate the Eberron artificer, someone really needs to sit them down with a copy of the 3E Eberron book and make them read the entire class write-up. This feels more like a Pathfinder alchemist made more interesting.

I mean, it's a good class. It just doesn't scream "Eberron" like the original did. This one more screams "Faerun."

To make my words clearer: With Eberron, magic items could be factory-produced. There was even blueprints found, in-setting, for a factory to produce an entire race (the warforged). Eberron was 3E's magic item creation rules pushed to their logical exaggeration and built entirely around that. This class doesn't reflect that.

 

[happyhermit]

Well, um... They get an A for effort?

It's an interesting class, and one I would play, but if it's an attempt to replicate the Eberron artificer, someone really needs to sit them down with a copy of the 3E Eberron book and make them read the entire class write-up. This feels more like a Pathfinder alchemist made more interesting.

I mean, it's a good class. It just doesn't scream "Eberron" like the original did. This one more screams "Faerun."

To make my words clearer: With Eberron, magic items could be factory-produced. There was even blueprints found, in-setting, for a factory to produce an entire race (the warforged). Eberron was 3E's magic item creation rules pushed to their logical exaggeration and built entirely around that. This class doesn't reflect that.

Well, it's a 5e artificer. The edition is going to have an effect as well, not just the setting. Even the most core classes in 5e can be very different from their earlier iterations in a way that has nothing to do with setting. I think the 4e artificer (which I am most familiar with and one of the things I liked in 4e), was quite different from either, really.

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

Well, it's a 5e artificer. The edition is going to have an effect as well, not just the setting. Even the most core classes in 5e can be very different from their earlier iterations in a way that has nothing to do with setting. I think the 4e artificer (which I am most familiar with and one of the things I liked in 4e), was quite different from either, really.

I've stated elsewhere I don't think Eberron as a setting is really compatible with 5E. The core assumptions that are essential to Eberron don't exist this time around.

 

[Flamestrike]

Would you mind it in the base class if it was a mount? It would be very easy to limit the choices to creatures usable as mounts.

Id prefer it not be there in the base class. I love the option in a subclass though - thinks like the Gondsman in Faerun are now a thing.

Id just like to be able to play an Artificer that deals with magic items and doesnt have a golem.

I mean, you dont have to build one I guess. But then the level becomes a dead level.

Move it to the gunfighter archetype as a 6th level feature. Then give the alchemist a class feature (mutagen?) to make up for the loss at 6th. Now create a martial/ black blade/ blade-bound magesmith/ runesmith archetype with extra attack at that level, and a scaling magical sword (and martial weapons).

 

[Demetrios1453]

I mean, it's a good class. It just doesn't scream "Eberron" like the original did. This one more screams "Faerun."

It doesn't scream "Faerun" either. It really doesn't "scream" any established setting, really, other than, with a stretch, the gnomes of Mt Nevermind on Krynn. It pretty much stands on its own without references, and it's perfectly serviceable for that in the end...