Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Introduces The Artifcer

I don't think anyone saw this coming!

 

[happyhermit]

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.

Fair enough, much of what Eberron has going on... doesn't match my preferences, so I am no expert. With only 2(?) iterations though, I think it's hard to pin down what is essential to the setting though. Not for individual fans, any new take on something is guaranteed not to please all of it's fans, but on the whole and/or two it's creators.

I think 5e is very flexible though, and with some additional/variant rules I think we will see it used for some very different things in the future, some of them turning out well.

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

Fair enough, much of what Eberron has going on... doesn't match my preferences, so I am no expert. With only 2(?) iterations though, I think it's hard to pin down what is essential to the setting though. Not for individual fans, any new take on something is guaranteed not to please all of it's fans, but on the whole and/or two it's creators.

I think 5e is very flexible though, and with some additional/variant rules I think we will see it used for some very different things in the future, some of them turning out well.

The setting is the 1920s-era adventure films and stories, like Tarzan and Indiana Jones, only with magic instead of technology. In the first core Eberron book, it talked massively about mass production of magic items. An NPC class was even created for the setting to match this (the magewright). The factory-style production of magic items was also incorporated into the backstory of the warforged race, who were basically mass-produced weapons of war, and the artificer class.

This is the setting that not only introduced magic trains, but gave you what was necessary for a character to build one.

Then there's the expansion material, which introduced things such as schemas (magic item blueprints), and even artifacts that could be constructed.

You really can't remove the idea of magic items being mass-produced without introducing a new origin for a player race, rewriting major parts of the war that just happened which are key to the setting, restructuring the history of three continents, dropping or heavily rewriting 90% of the plotpoints for the continent players are likely to spend most of their time on, or rewriting a character class.

It's almost like writing an entirely new setting. And this wasn't a setting intended to change and update as time goes on, unlike Faerun.

 

[cbwjm]

It should be fine to run eberron in 5e. I see no reason why it wouldn't work well. If it is because if 5e going low on the magic items, I don't think that should stop updating the setting, including the high use of magic items. Add in magic trinkets that do things like +1 to a single save or provide access to a single cantrip like a wand of mending. Loading up on magic items in the setting doesn't necessarily mean it needs to have all of the most powerful items available for the low level heroes.

Sent from my SM-G925I using EN World mobile app

 

[M.T. Black]

I like it. I'd like them to ramp up the artificer theme even further.

Instead of making the class a spellcaster (we already have plenty of those), the artificer should create little inventions that give spell-like abilities. So instead of learning "cure wounds", you create a little heal-o-matic device (perhaps resembling a gonzo syringe) which otherwise operates like the cure wounds spell. And so on.

By the time they get to higher levels, they'll be walking around with a backpack full of useful little inventions - which is exactly how I imagine them.

 

[happyhermit]

The setting is the 1920s-era adventure films and stories, like Tarzan and Indiana Jones, only with magic instead of technology. In the first core Eberron book, it talked massively about mass production of magic items. An NPC class was even created for the setting to match this (the magewright). The factory-style production of magic items was also incorporated into the backstory of the warforged race, who were basically mass-produced weapons of war, and the artificer class.

This is the setting that not only introduced magic trains, but gave you what was necessary for a character to build one.

Then there's the expansion material, which introduced things such as schemas (magic item blueprints), and even artifacts that could be constructed.

You really can't remove the idea of magic items being mass-produced without introducing a new origin for a player race, rewriting major parts of the war that just happened which are key to the setting, restructuring the history of three continents, dropping or heavily rewriting 90% of the plotpoints for the continent players are likely to spend most of their time on, or rewriting a character class.

It's almost like writing an entirely new setting. And this wasn't a setting intended to change and update as time goes on, unlike Faerun.

Sure, but even if "mass-produced magic items" is essential to the setting, what does that really mean for players. It is not as though PCs were walking into the game head to toe in +5 magic gear, what the party had was still limited to work within the system. Magic trains and ancient races built by magi-tech doesn't have much impact mechanically on a 1st level adventuring party, and things that might are not impossible to tweak. Is this abundance of magic items necessarily linked to +X items, or is that just the system it was designed for. How many +X items can 5e handle with some rules tweaks?

Heck, keeping atunement in place, or tweaking it could go a long way to dealing with these issues. Obviously things like this will be a change but they need not lose the flavour of the original setting.

Anyways, somewhat off-topic, I see your point but also potential solutions.

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

Sure, but even if "mass-produced magic items" is essential to the setting, what does that really mean for players. It is not as though PCs were walking into the game head to toe in +5 magic gear, what the party had was still limited to work within the system. Magic trains and ancient races built by magi-tech doesn't have much impact mechanically on a 1st level adventuring party, and things that might are not impossible to tweak. Is this abundance of magic items necessarily linked to +X items, or is that just the system it was designed for. How many +X items can 5e handle with some rules tweaks?

Heck, keeping atunement in place, or tweaking it could go a long way to dealing with these issues. Obviously things like this will be a change but they need not lose the flavour of the original setting.

Anyways, somewhat off-topic, I see your point but also potential solutions.

They were limited entirely by what the DM would allow them to have, but overall... it had a massive effect. Rapid travel across an entire continent was pretty common, as well as rapid travel to other continents. Flying without need of the fly spell was also common, to the point you had more options than you'd ever need. And that's not counting the fact that shops not only existed that sold magic items of all sorts, but that those shops were common.

Basically, your limitation on how much magic you had was how high a +X the DM was willing to go and how much money you had on hand. And that's before you started going into tombs of ancient civilizations that were even more magically advanced. That's why the artificer was designed to be able to make magic items. It simply made no sense, for the setting, to have the players limited in that area.

Now, keep in mind I'm not even discussing dragonmarks, eternal wands, or other items that were intended to stretch your magic even further. The setting was designed to hand out magic like it's candy, and even made it a point to include spell book options to reflect this.

So, at first level, should you be carrying around a +5 sword of Everything Slaying? No. But at the same time, there's no reason why you shouldn't have scrolls at the end of chargen. The artificer allowed for that.

That's why I'm not seeing this class as really matching the Eberron original. And I'm not seeing solutions that don't involve ignoring key elements of the setting.

And, yeah, this is off-topic. I mean, this is a good class. I would still play the 5E build. I just wouldn't play Eberron.

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

Spellcasting
They are a 1/3 caster, without cantrips? Oversight much? Cantrips are one of the best parts of 5e, proliferate access to them please.

I think it is intentional that they don't get cantrips as many of the abilities they get from their subclass are at will.

 

[gweinel]

It is of course a better iteration of Artificer but still i am not thrilled.

From the two subclasses, the only one that could possibly see in my campaign is the alchemist, since there aren't fire arms in my world. But alchemist isn't represented/flavored as good. The satchel with the unlimited phials that last only some minutes doesn't fit in my artificer or alchemist concept. It fit to a concept when someone wants to force some abilities and powers in a class and can't find a good way.

On the good side i liked the mechanical companion and would love to see the idea expanded.

 

[Aldarc]

Also does anyone else find it odd that the UA Artificer lacks "Use Magic Device" as a class ability? I know that's the Thief Rogue's schtick, but magic items are moreso the Artificer's.

 

[Ath-kethin]

I like it. I'd like them to ramp up the artificer theme even further.

Instead of making the class a spellcaster (we already have plenty of those), the artificer should create little inventions that give spell-like abilities. So instead of learning "cure wounds", you create a little heal-o-matic device (perhaps resembling a gonzo syringe) which otherwise operates like the cure wounds spell. And so on.

By the time they get to higher levels, they'll be walking around with a backpack full of useful little inventions - which is exactly how I imagine them.

I agree with this assessment. Even though I would describe the Artificer's "spellcasting" in my campaign differently than that of a warlock or clerics or wherever, I think just making the class a caster is lazy thinking.

I like that the devs have finally put something NEW into the game, instead of just rehashing what's already there, but they didn't go far enough with it.