Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition (A5E)
Playtest the ARTIFICER (Kickstarter backers only)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="noodohs" data-source="post: 8483102" data-attributes="member: 7033037"><p>Overall, I really like the core artificer class in LU, but I find the archetypes to all be pretty lackluster and, unfortunately, that means there's not much reason for me to want to play an artificer. I'll get to that in a minute, but for the core class I do think there's a bit of a problem in that it is trying to do what O5e did and make the artificer both an inventor and an alchemist and I really don't think that makes a lot of sense. One is a chemist, the other is an engineer. PF2e's idea of splitting into two classes made more sense to me, in which case the bombardier fits in as an alchemist archetype instead. All of the alchemical stuff that is currently part of the artificer would move over, too, but the end result is that each class can fill their niche better with more unique features instead of trying to cram so much into one class. Maybe that's just me, though. I still like the core concept, though, especially spell inventions. Having said that, on to nit picks:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">With spell inventions, it says that you need both the spell invention <em>and</em> your tools (or an infused item) to use as a focus to cast spells. This means that you basically cannot cast spells unless you have two hands free, so you'd be unable to, say, wield a weapon and cast a spell unless that weapon happens to be infused (which you can't do at 1st level). Seems to me that the invention ought to be enough.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Spell inventions weigh 1 lb per spell level, but you could make one for a 1st-level spell and cast it at a higher level, effectively having a 2nd-level spell that weighs less. I dunno, the weight requirement just seems so arbitrary and unnecessary.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">At higher levels, you can give your spell invention to someone else to cast it. Does the spell use your stats or theirs?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">For tactical chemistry, do I just make these things out of thin air or do I need some material components? If it's the latter, what materials do I need for each one?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The schematic book is a neat idea, but as someone else mentioned, I think the availability of schematics needs to be fleshed out for it to work well. A wizard gets to add spells every level, but the only way to add schematics is to either find them or successfully reverse engineer a magic item. Depending on the setting/narrator, you could end up with 5 schematics or 20. Your infusions also depend on the availability of schematics, so I really think there should be some sort of every x levels you can add some number of schematics for free thing.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Speaking of infusions, the infusion recharge feature allows me to sacrifice an infusion use, but does it only work if I have an unused infusion or can I give up an infusion on an item to use the feature?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">For trinket master, I assume I can only work on one item per long rest, but maybe it would be best to spell it out (unless it is already spelled out in the general crafting rules).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">As others have mentioned, Laboratory of the Master is a neat ability, but it happens way too late to be useful and even then it is mostly only helpful while you are hanging out in your lab. It has almost no utility while actually adventuring, so it's unfortunately kind of a lame capstone (sorry).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">For Modern Comforts, I assume that when you repurpose the spell invention, you lose the use of it for that period of rest, but do you get it back in the morning?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I have mixed feelings about the archetype spell lists. At least a handful of the spells on these lists are already artificer spells, so the only difference is that you get it in addition to your other spells. It's also not clear here, but I get the impression that these are not "always prepared" as some have suggested, they are optionally prepared in addition to your other spells, but that leads us to...</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The Engineer and Stitcher. I really don't like that you have to give up spells for modifications. Considering that your spells are only guaranteed to work once per day, you could, with bad luck, end up with one or two cool modifications and one spell for an entire day (depending on your level, of course). I dunno, it just feels bad. By contrast, the Bombardier has no reason not to prepare their archetype spells every day, so the idea of them being optional doesn't even make sense for them.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Maybe it's a nitpick, but the Engineer should really be called Mechanic. When I think engineer, I think of someone more like a scientist or an inventor, whereas this archetype is more of a hot rod car enthusiast. An engineer would be more akin to the Battle Smith O5e subclass.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Speaking of which, none of the archetypes really have anything to do with inventing things, which, to me, is kind of the point of an artificer. Maybe I'm biased because I'm currently playing a Battle Smith in O5e and there is no really analogous archetype here, but it just feels like the archetypes miss the point. Bombardier is more of an alchemist and the Stitcher is more of a medical professional (maybe it could be an artificer/cleric multiclass feat tree?). The Mechanic (Engineer) is the only one that really seems to have anything to do with artifice and personally I don't really care for it, not because it's bad but it's just not my cup of tea.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Specifically with the Stitcher, I think it's cool that they get resurrection, but I'm struggling to imagine any time I would want to use it within the specified parameters. Yes, I could bring back an ally, but only once and they'd become a monstrosity. I could bring back an enemy, but they don't have to listen to me. No one in town is going to want to come back a monster. Maybe I'm just missing something?</li> </ul><p>TL;DR: I really like the core concept, but I feel like the alchemical bits should be split off into another class and two of the three archetypes don't really feel like they have anything to do with artifice.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="noodohs, post: 8483102, member: 7033037"] Overall, I really like the core artificer class in LU, but I find the archetypes to all be pretty lackluster and, unfortunately, that means there's not much reason for me to want to play an artificer. I'll get to that in a minute, but for the core class I do think there's a bit of a problem in that it is trying to do what O5e did and make the artificer both an inventor and an alchemist and I really don't think that makes a lot of sense. One is a chemist, the other is an engineer. PF2e's idea of splitting into two classes made more sense to me, in which case the bombardier fits in as an alchemist archetype instead. All of the alchemical stuff that is currently part of the artificer would move over, too, but the end result is that each class can fill their niche better with more unique features instead of trying to cram so much into one class. Maybe that's just me, though. I still like the core concept, though, especially spell inventions. Having said that, on to nit picks: [LIST] [*]With spell inventions, it says that you need both the spell invention [I]and[/I] your tools (or an infused item) to use as a focus to cast spells. This means that you basically cannot cast spells unless you have two hands free, so you'd be unable to, say, wield a weapon and cast a spell unless that weapon happens to be infused (which you can't do at 1st level). Seems to me that the invention ought to be enough. [*]Spell inventions weigh 1 lb per spell level, but you could make one for a 1st-level spell and cast it at a higher level, effectively having a 2nd-level spell that weighs less. I dunno, the weight requirement just seems so arbitrary and unnecessary. [*]At higher levels, you can give your spell invention to someone else to cast it. Does the spell use your stats or theirs? [*]For tactical chemistry, do I just make these things out of thin air or do I need some material components? If it's the latter, what materials do I need for each one? [*]The schematic book is a neat idea, but as someone else mentioned, I think the availability of schematics needs to be fleshed out for it to work well. A wizard gets to add spells every level, but the only way to add schematics is to either find them or successfully reverse engineer a magic item. Depending on the setting/narrator, you could end up with 5 schematics or 20. Your infusions also depend on the availability of schematics, so I really think there should be some sort of every x levels you can add some number of schematics for free thing. [*]Speaking of infusions, the infusion recharge feature allows me to sacrifice an infusion use, but does it only work if I have an unused infusion or can I give up an infusion on an item to use the feature? [*]For trinket master, I assume I can only work on one item per long rest, but maybe it would be best to spell it out (unless it is already spelled out in the general crafting rules). [*]As others have mentioned, Laboratory of the Master is a neat ability, but it happens way too late to be useful and even then it is mostly only helpful while you are hanging out in your lab. It has almost no utility while actually adventuring, so it's unfortunately kind of a lame capstone (sorry). [*]For Modern Comforts, I assume that when you repurpose the spell invention, you lose the use of it for that period of rest, but do you get it back in the morning? [*]I have mixed feelings about the archetype spell lists. At least a handful of the spells on these lists are already artificer spells, so the only difference is that you get it in addition to your other spells. It's also not clear here, but I get the impression that these are not "always prepared" as some have suggested, they are optionally prepared in addition to your other spells, but that leads us to... [*]The Engineer and Stitcher. I really don't like that you have to give up spells for modifications. Considering that your spells are only guaranteed to work once per day, you could, with bad luck, end up with one or two cool modifications and one spell for an entire day (depending on your level, of course). I dunno, it just feels bad. By contrast, the Bombardier has no reason not to prepare their archetype spells every day, so the idea of them being optional doesn't even make sense for them. [*]Maybe it's a nitpick, but the Engineer should really be called Mechanic. When I think engineer, I think of someone more like a scientist or an inventor, whereas this archetype is more of a hot rod car enthusiast. An engineer would be more akin to the Battle Smith O5e subclass. [*]Speaking of which, none of the archetypes really have anything to do with inventing things, which, to me, is kind of the point of an artificer. Maybe I'm biased because I'm currently playing a Battle Smith in O5e and there is no really analogous archetype here, but it just feels like the archetypes miss the point. Bombardier is more of an alchemist and the Stitcher is more of a medical professional (maybe it could be an artificer/cleric multiclass feat tree?). The Mechanic (Engineer) is the only one that really seems to have anything to do with artifice and personally I don't really care for it, not because it's bad but it's just not my cup of tea. [*]Specifically with the Stitcher, I think it's cool that they get resurrection, but I'm struggling to imagine any time I would want to use it within the specified parameters. Yes, I could bring back an ally, but only once and they'd become a monstrosity. I could bring back an enemy, but they don't have to listen to me. No one in town is going to want to come back a monster. Maybe I'm just missing something? [/LIST] TL;DR: I really like the core concept, but I feel like the alchemical bits should be split off into another class and two of the three archetypes don't really feel like they have anything to do with artifice. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition (A5E)
Playtest the ARTIFICER (Kickstarter backers only)
Top