Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Introduces The Artifcer

I don't think anyone saw this coming!

 

[Parmandur]

An Artificer that's not a wizard? What the hell? Well, good luck with this one, I'm not wasting any more time with it.

More or less defined by not being Wwizards in the past?

 

[mellored]

Well, it's certainly better than the wizard subclass. But IMO, it feels like a support warlock.

You get a strong at-will cantrips, some at-will/passive invocations, and some spells to supplement.
Might as well just reflavor eldritch blast as a gun and call it a day.


The only thing that really makes it feel like an "artificer" is Infuse Magic. That's a unique and defining mechanic.
And maybe the construct, though that overlaps with druids/rangers a bit.


What they need is a reason for the artificer to tinker with magic items. Not just creating a few new ones, but they also need to grab the flame tounges from the fighter, tinker with it and give it back even better.
For instance, if they could turn a +1 longsword into a +2 maul, increase the damage dice on flame tongue, or a cloak of fire resist into a cloak of fire and cold resist, that woul be artificer-y. (with some kind of XP/residium/rareity limit for balance).
They should also start them with a small set of formulas and let them learn more as they find new items, similar to a wizard's spell book.

Yes, that means artificers need to look at the magic item list in the DMG. But that's exactly what their character would be doing, looking at magic items formulas.


Also a clockwork mechanic sub-class. I want swarms of dumb, programmed mechanical bees.




As far as balance, it seems pretty good. So thumbs up for that, but it's just not special.

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

it seems this artificer subclasses more fits a world where technolegy and magic live side by side.
Not a world where magic has basicly replaced technolegy like Eberon.

 

[Garresh]

Fair points. Thank you for setting me straight.

I seek truth above all else.

Apologies if I come across as caustic at times. Just trying to balance and assess.

 

[MasterJeedai]

So here are my thoughts. Sorry it turn out to be a little long.

I love that artificer has its own class. Artificer and craftsman are stable of fantasy that really gives any setting extra depth. That said the flavor of this class rubbed me the wrong way. I find it to really narrowing and limiting on what an artificer is by making only magical tech instead of being more encompassing (elves artificer infuse and grow planets, dwarves crave stone, orcs use bone, etc.). I understand that it is UA so the favor isn’t set and a DM can reflovor it but I feel like they are testing the direction they want to go with the main D&D setting. I love how D&D has handled fire arms and tech based things as niche items used only very few people but made up for in general by magic. When fire arms and tech are treated like this it makes fun for rp and lets players feel special and powerful with out ruining the sword and sorcery feel of the setting. I just don’t want the main D&D settings to turn into steampunk/renaissance fantasy or hybrid fantasy like Warhammer or World of Warcraft, where every dwarf carries a boom stick. I don’t mind FR’s and other D&D setting progressing but I want it to be more uniquely magically based and not tech-magic based. I would love to have a new setting that is that hybrid style.

I was really impressed by some the design aspects of the base class as it fits the feels of an artificer as an infuser of magic to create or make things but this lacks synergy with feel and play the subclasses. Infuse Magic ability is amazing; it fits the class perfectly and works well game play wise. Wondrous Item needs some tweaking and away to repair (especially for things like robe of useful items)/replace or maybe upgrade items. As a DM I am ok with Superior Attunement but I would feel the need let player know in a low magic setting that they might not use it. Soul of Artifice seems a little strong but also dependant outside factors. I kind like this as it will scale with magic level of the campaign. If there are a lot magic items in the campaign then it gives a higher boost and in a really low level magic campaign it may only get +2 or using its own craft items.

I think they are missing a few key abilities. A core concept of there case is infusing magic into things with magic to animate them. I would like see them get animate object as a class feature. Maybe cast as ritual and/or letting them use as an infusion (shove stone in object and animate it). There should also really be away for them to learn to make golems. “Use magical device” is another one the core concept of there class and lets them use magical items with out class/race restrictions (maybe at a high level as to not tread on the thief).

 

[MasterJeedai]

The mechanical servant is the thing that bothers me the most. I can see some gnomes maybe walking around with a machine behind them and I’d hate to play games where every artificer giant machine next to them. It should be called a construct servant. Constructs have a rich history in D&D and have been made form almost anything. This gives some great flavor and rp opportunities and allows the class to more easy fit into any race or setting. An elf might grow and infuse planets to make Groot or Ent creature, a goblin could make his out the flesh of his dead enemies, a drawf crave his from stone, or Lizardfolk reanimating its greatest prey. It would be cool to if the proved away to build it with some of these features.

I also find this so be the most unbalance part of the build as it out classes the beastmaster for a couple of levels. It is interesting to note that the giant eagle, owl and vulture can used the infused spells as they have higher then 6 int. I wish they had a large version of an ape as look and rock throwing attack are how would generally view a construct (also has an int of great then six). An option of smaller construct would be good as large construct may not for certain campaign or be wanted by all players.

 

[MasterJeedai]

Alchemist is a good subclass but the flavor of its workings is weird. It makes more link to the main class it should just stay that he just infuses the vials as they withdraw and if not used before a certain time the infuse wears off. I don’t think game wise it needs/should to have ammo/vile count but it would feel less weird by coping in the ammo mechanic from the gunsmith.

I like the Gunsmith mechanically I don’t think they will out shine other range PC. I think the cannon should have change hurting the wielder if used by someone other then gunsmith. This would make feel more niche and special. Variant option for how to convert to wands, staffs, etc. should be included in the official build. More option would be cool and the different levels to allow other types of elements (ei instead taking piercing shot maybe take a flamethrower type attack).

This class can be used to have some really cool subclass options. Having subclass at first level is smart idea for this class as allows great customization. Some subclass ideas I have are; a rune craftsmen’s that forges his amour and weapons and empowers them (melee fighting build), a construct specialist subclass that focuses empowering the construct with infusing magic (making more defense and spell casting instead of the beast masters damage focus animal), or a spell slinger with power offensive magic that make be use to set traps or case close range spells at a distance.

Anyways thanks reading though my ideas and let me know what you think.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I didnt say it gets both. I said it can aoe and single target with both at will (not per rest, at will, all day, infinite). That is a pretty big boon for a variety of reasons. The damage numbers are simply too high for a class with this much flexibility. A ranged warlock, whose spell list is fairly meh, and gets either ritual casting or an invisible familiar should not be outclassed by this guy. A rogue should have dpr numbers much higher than him as well since that is pretty much all he does. It shouldnt be close.

Hahahaha. The warlock is so not outclassed by the Artificer.

Even if we ignore invocations (Agonizing Repelling Blast + e.g. Wall of Fire = up to 4d10+20d8+20 (132) damage per round; can use other terrain hazards including 4d4 Spike Growth or 20d6 cliff faces as appropriate), the alchemist spell list doesn't begin to compare to the warlock's spell list. What's better at 17th level, Death Ward (Alchemist) or True Polymorph into an adult red dragon (Warlock)? Oh wait, I'm sorry, the alchemist doesn't even get Death Ward until 19th level.

Hypnotic Pattern, Fly, Armor of Agathys, Mass Suggestion, True Polymorph, Forcecage... the warlock's spell list isn't as good as the wizard's but it's pretty good--loads better than the alchemist's.

 

[SkidAce]

An Artificer that's not a wizard? What the hell? Well, good luck with this one, I'm not wasting any more time with it.

A wizard is or can already be an artificer. They (PC or NPC depending on the campaign) are the ones making the magical items in the first place.

 

[Belltent]

Not all of us play with feat or multiclassing optional rules (as described in official game materials). Yes, when playing with optional rules that create powergamey combos, the game breaks apart and things may change (this is true of every rpg ever). However, playing the game as designed without the poorly designed optional rules is very different. Even with xbow expert, having to burn a feat to be mildly competative (but still worse) with this broken class hints at a balance problem.

If you don't play with optional rules, why are you looking at a UA?