Originally, this thread was just a vast, ominious lump of text. I've broken it up into different posts within this thread for ease of perusal.
So... the Artificer. As iconic to Eberron as the Warforged, Mournland, and the phrase "shades of grey." But since the Eberron Player's Guide (which I presume is the most likely book to contain this information) isn't going to be released in a good while, what are those of us planning to run 4E Eberron games to do in the mean time?
How about hammer out a homebrew?
Below are my thoughts regarding a 4e Artificer class. I welcome debate, suggestion, constructive criticism, etc. Once the full 4e rules are actually released in June we can probably make some more informed predictions. Until then, however, we're stuck with what we can scrape out of the internet. So, here goes.
The original content of this thread begins at thread 15.
By reading Race and Classses:
Arcane - PHB (Wizard and Warlock and SwordMage in 4.0 FRCS)
Martial - PHB (Ranger, Rogue, Fighter, Warlord) Martial Power ???
Divine - PHB (Cleric and Paladin)
Primal - PHB II ? (Barbarian, Druid, Shaman, ect.)
Shadow - PHB II ? (Necromancer, Illusionist)
Psychic - PHB ?? (hopefully a Psion will make it into the PHB II)
Elemental - PHB ?? (Sorcerer) (This includes Draconic Powers)
Ki - PHB ?? (Monk, and other oriental figures)
9th power source - Creation - Bard and Artificer (much better than Tech but covers technology well.)
The Gnome race could have the racial features of creation just like the halfling has the racial features of luck.
I came to these conclusions by carefully reading each of the descriptions on pages 82 to 87 in the book Races and Classes.
The problem with making an Artificer a leader is that the Bard will be in the same power source as the Artificer (either creation or arcane) and we know the Bard will be a leader. Otherwise a Leader is an interesting choice.
Your power ideas are good as well, but given the direction the Multi-class preview (on The WotC website) has taken, classes like the Artificer will not be allowed to grab other classes' abilities with ease. This is to protect classes and allow WotC to continue making new classes and keep 4.0 alive and well for a long time.
Show
As far as I can tell, those latter two power sources you suggest are entirely speculation on the part of the fans. I fail to see how Elemental (so Earth, Air, Fire, Water, right?) is any different from either Primal or Arcane, for example. That's a debate for another thread, though.
As for "Creation," I don't really see that either. How is this "Creation" different from Arcane? Why is the Bard making up songs a different power source than the Wizard making up spells? And why would the Artificer and Bard automatically be from the same Power Source?
And similarly, why would the Artificer be lumped into Creation in the first place when he's really not much more creative than a Wizard who's taken item creation feats (just better at it)? As for Creation encompassing technology, I don't see the relevance there either. The Artificer doesn't have anything to DO with technology. He doesn't make steam engines or repeating rifles, he makes eternal wands and Bags of Holding.
And about the Role of Leader being shared with the Bard... So? Rogues and Rangers are both Martial Strikers, they just go about their task in a different fashion. If the Bard and Artificer were both Arcane Leaders, I don't see a problem if they do their task differently.
As for grabbing other classes' abilities with ease, there's a way to fix that: Don't make it easy.
The Artificer's main schtick is the ability to "fake it." Without that, he's severly less Artificery. Now, the 3.5 infusion Spell Storing Item DOES have limitations, I believe, so we just need to find the most balanced limitations for the new iteration.
What I envision Spell Storing Item to do is allow the Artificer to essentially make a temporary magic item, and activate that item to use a power stored within it. As far as I can tell, magic items in 4e are moving away from +1 Scimitars and more towards Circlets of Blasting, Boots of Speed, and other items that provide additional abilities. This is basically what Spell Storing Item has always done (albeit previously the items behaved like one-shot wands).
And I don't see how letting the Artificer temporarily copy the occasional power from another class prevents WotC from making more classes. Care to explain how that works?
There are supposed to be 8 primary power sources that cover 90% of all character classes.
By reading Race and Classses:
Arcane - PHB (Wizard and Warlock and SwordMage in 4.0 FRCS)
Martial - PHB (Ranger, Rogue, Fighter, Warlord) Martial Power ???
Divine - PHB (Cleric and Paladin)
Primal - PHB II ? (Barbarian, Druid, Shaman, ect.)
Shadow - PHB II ? (Necromancer, Illusionist)
Psychic - PHB ?? (hopefully a Psion will make it into the PHB II)
Elemental - PHB ?? (Sorcerer) (This includes Draconic Powers)
Ki - PHB ?? (Monk, and other oriental figures)
9th power source - Creation - Bard and Artificer (much better than Tech but covers technology well.)
The Gnome race could have the racial features of creation just like the halfling has the racial features of luck.
I came to these conclusions by carefully reading each of the descriptions on pages 82 to 87 in the book Races and Classes.
The problem with making an Artificer a leader is that the Bard will be in the same power source as the Artificer (either creation or arcane) and we know the Bard will be a leader. Otherwise a Leader is an interesting choice.
Your power ideas are good as well, but given the direction the Multi-class preview (on The WotC website) has taken, classes like the Artificer will not be allowed to grab other classes' abilities with ease. This is to protect classes and allow WotC to continue making new classes and keep 4.0 alive and well for a long time.
As far as I can tell, those latter two power sources you suggest are entirely speculation on the part of the fans. I fail to see how Elemental (so Earth, Air, Fire, Water, right?) is any different from either Primal or Arcane, for example. That's a debate for another thread, though.
As for "Creation," I don't really see that either. How is this "Creation" different from Arcane? Why is the Bard making up songs a different power source than the Wizard making up spells? And why would the Artificer and Bard automatically be from the same Power Source?
And similarly, why would the Artificer be lumped into Creation in the first place when he's really not much more creative than a Wizard who's taken item creation feats (just better at it)? As for Creation encompassing technology, I don't see the relevance there either. The Artificer doesn't have anything to DO with technology. He doesn't make steam engines or repeating rifles, he makes eternal wands and Bags of Holding.
And about the Role of Leader being shared with the Bard... So? Rogues and Rangers are both Martial Strikers, they just go about their task in a different fashion. If the Bard and Artificer were both Arcane Leaders, I don't see a problem if they do their task differently.
As for grabbing other classes' abilities with ease, there's a way to fix that: Don't make it easy.
The Artificer's main schtick is the ability to "fake it." Without that, he's severly less Artificery. Now, the 3.5 infusion Spell Storing Item DOES have limitations, I believe, so we just need to find the most balanced limitations for the new iteration.What I envision Spell Storing Item to do is allow the Artificer to essentially make a temporary magic item, and activate that item to use a power stored within it. As far as I can tell, magic items in 4e are moving away from +1 Scimitars and more towards Circlets of Blasting, Boots of Speed, and other items that provide additional abilities. This is basically what Spell Storing Item has always done (albeit previously the items behaved like one-shot wands).
And I don't see how letting the Artificer temporarily copy the occasional power from another class prevents WotC from making more classes. Care to explain how that works?
EDIT: A few more powers added.
Inflict Structural Damage, Artificer Attack 1
Energy crackles around your hand as you lay it upon your opponent, shattering the eldritch bonds that hold it together.
At-Will, Arcane/Artifice/Whatever, Implement, Force
Standard Action, Melee
Target: One construct creature
Attack: Intelligence vs. Ref
Hit: 2d6 + Int thunder damage
Special: This power counts as a melee basic attack. When a power allows you to make a melee basic attack, you can use this power.
While I do congratulate you for trying to tackle the most difficult class that WotC will work on next year, please try to approach things from a 4.0 point of view instead of a 3.5 point of view. EI: Look at things from the DM's point of view instead of the player's point of view.
This is a first level artificer at will power.
It does thunder damage (energy type).
It can be used as a basic attack (for AoO and so forth).
A wizard needs a Paragon Path to do something like this.
It does an average of (3.5+3.5 + (4 or 5 damage)) = 12
A Cleric (leader type) is likely to do (4.5 +4 damage) =8.5 and give a bonus to hit.
See lance of faith for details.
A Fighter (defender type) is likely to do (5.5 +5 damage) =10.5 with its basic attack that is vs. AC.
A Warlock (striker type) is likely to do (5.5 +4 (+3.5 Warlock's curse)) =13 damage but only on the enemy that was nearest them and cursed. This is not used as a basic attack.
Hence this ability is better than what all the other classes get at first level.
Adding to this is the ability to steal things from other classes without the harsher restriction that multi-classing allows. Multi-classing allows you to only get things from a single class. And so far, at will powers become encounter power, encounter powers become daily powers. Daily powers might not be given out.
But in your class design, you are allowing a daily power from any other class to be used as a daily power in the artificer class.
In 4.0 the designers realized that D&D is a cooperative game and that play must be balanced at all costs. If even a single class outshines everything else then all the other classes will fall into neglect.
If an artificer can be versatile enough to take the place of another class and mimic all its talents, people will feel that their special class is not so special anymore. If an artificer can do anything you can do better who will play anything else? This is called "Class Protection" and it is a very important concept.
As far as I can tell, those latter two power sources you suggest are entirely speculation on the part of the fans.
I stated that thru carefully reading of the preview book, Races and Classes that I had come up with my list. I do not claim it to be perfect nor do I claim to have inside knowledge but I do have a basis on which I made this list.
I posted the list, because it is important to see exactly why the Gnome Race could have been left for the second player's handbook. It is linked to the artificer and bard classes being left for later also.
Regarding the
Monk - Ki - Striker
and the
Samurai - Ki - Defender
and others
Please refer to page 83 of the Races and Classes book:
"What others accomplish with magic and steel, monks can do with their bodies and minds."
Yet there is no mention of them being included in the upcoming book Martial Power.
Which leaves Ki or Psychic Power for them to use.
"Monks live an ascetic lifestyle and carry minimal gear..."
This indicates that monks will return to their early AD&D roots which made it illegal to carry magical items at all. In going this direction, the designers will also at this same time explore the Artificer who actually temporary creates magical items.
"In battle no one is faster...a monk can execute rapid maneuvers that send his opponent flying...A monk's defenses are also strong-an awareness of his own body...and he can channel his ki to heal his own wounds."
Notice the word ki used in a sentence in such a way as it can unmistakable be classified as nothing else but a power source.
Moving onward and discussing the Sorcerer.
By elemental, I expand the thought to all energy just like a draconic power set would encompass all forms of pure energy.
Dragons and Sorcerers have long been associated with each other, in fact most 3.5 dragons gain Sorcerer spells.
Again reading from Races and Classes on page 85:
"The sorcerer present an interesting design challenge in that the class stands so close to the wizard...The design team posited a class that has a more rudimentary simplistic style of magic."
At this point, the Sorcerer seems likely to not be arcane and possibly be Primal.
However, in Races and Classes page 82:
"...We've also tied barbarians and druids closer together, creating a relationship between them similar to the link between paladins and clerics. If a paladin is the sword of the faith, the barbarian is nature's fury given physical form..."
Notice several things here, Primal is described as closely linked to nature. The Sorcerer and the Bard were not mentioned in these sentences even though it would have been very easy to do so. Is the Sorcerer Primal? Not according to that quote when you compare it to this from Races and Classes page 85:
"The power wielded by a sorcerer is powerful enough that even after a spell is done, ambient energy swirls around him. A sorcerer who blasts you with a cold spell is protected be a small swirling cloud of snow and ice for a short time. One who unleashes a fireball bursts into flames that scorch enemies who try to attack..."
This is not nature in type, but pure "elemental energy".
As for the Sorcerer being arcane, the designer are clearly trying to move away from the Wizards are better than Sorcerers and vice versa debate. This is part of class protection.
I often find it funny that people disregard creativity or creation as a source of power especially from the point of view of those making the D&D game. These folk draw on their creation/creativity powers every day as artists, writers and imagineers.
Creation is the ability to create things in many ways.
Songs are performing arts
Paintings are visual arts
Oratory is a form of performing arts
Dance is a form of performing arts
These things are created from the artist within the bard.
Reading Races and Classes page 82:
"A master of artistry and social grace..."
Already, the thought that a Bard is Primal is rapidly being dispelled.
In fact, the later sentence on the same page completely eliminates this possibility:
"...bards are accepted in most society and can enter doors that are closed to others (especially to other adventures.)..."
Moving onward where I left off:
"A master of artistry and social grace, a bard is a leader who wields magic both dramatic and subtle. Harnessing a natural talent for creativity (be it song, painting, dance or oratory)..."
Please note that the word natural and nature are two entirely different words with similar spelling. Also notice the key word creativity here. Continuing to quote:
"...a bard draws magic from otherworldly patrons that admire the bard's work. This is fundamentally different from the relationship other spellcasters have with their power sources. A bard is not a subservient worshiper like a cleric, nor does he bend forces to his will like a wizard..."
Here is a statement that the bard is quite different than the cleric and the wizard. Hence, the thought that the Bard is not arcane begins to form. Later on the same page we find this:
"With the skill to fool enemies with illusionary magic and to influence them with mental trickery..."
I believe someday we will see an Illusionist Class and an Enchanter Class. The Bard appears to have powers similar to these classes. The Illusionist class will probably be using Shadow power magic while the Enchanter may be using arcane magic. The Creation power is actually the polar opposite of the Shadow power. A bard will create an illusion instead of warping reality the way an illusionist will. A bard will create songs that affect one's mind instead of using magic to enchant. There is a subtle difference here.
It is important to understand the relationship between all the difference powers and classes before making a new class. This is the difference between 3.5 and 4.0 design work.
An artificer duplicates most any magical item for a temporary period of time. This is in fact the ability to create a temporary magical item, hence why I feel that this class fits neatly into the Creation power.
While in theory, an Artificer should be a leader type, a lot of artificer abilities are too slow to able to be used compare with the 4.0 Cleric. It takes time to imbue magic, sometimes a lot of time. This could even be rituals. Then there is the problem that magic items need to be very carefully controlled to prevent unbalance in 4.0.
I have witnessed an Artificer in one of my games strongly fill the role of controller--blasting away with two wands as good as or better than the wizard and Warmage.
In another one of my games, I have witnessed an Artificer strongly fill the role of defender--a Warforged in adamantine armor with a homunculus creation.
Yes, both of them had the privilege of buffing characters all they wanted before a battle that they were fully aware would happen, yet still their shining moments were as a controller and defender.
Yes, in theory, an Artificer should be a leader, but in practice it does all sort of things well.
So the huge issue remains, what is an Artificer?
The 3.5 artificer can do things so well, they bridge most gaps.
The 3.5 Artificer is too strong and needs adjusting just the 3.5 cleric and druid needed adjusting and redefining.
In Eberron, magic items are technology.
The Artificer is linked strongly to these magic items.
Read page 9 of the Eberron Campaign Setting Book:
"Ten things you need to know
#3) A world of magic.
The setting supposes a world that developed not through the advance of science, but by the mastery of arcane magic. This concept allows for certain conveniences unimagined in other medieval timeframes...Advances in magic items have led to everything from self-propelled farming implements to sentient, free willed constructs."
Show
There's a typo in there on my part. Initially I had suggested Inflict Structural Damage be Thunder, but on reflection Force looked better. I remembered to change the keyword, but not the effect. Whoopsie.
Still, I compared this power to the 4e Wizard's Magic Missile.
MM vs. ISD
Range 20 vs Melee
2d4 + Int vs 2d6 + Int
Any creature vs Construct creature
Force vs Force
Ranged basic attack vs Melee basic attack
Magic Missile seems a much more desirable At-Will power to me. It's useable in many more situations, rather than being stuck solely in melee anti-construct duty. It's really more comparable in utility to the Cleric's Turn Undead, though the latter is a class feature AND other powers can be used instead of it (other Channel Divinities). Should this be a class feature instead, perhaps?
Moving on...
Regarding Spell Storing Item, it's still a definate work in progress and in need of some refining. Spell Storing Item, along with Use Magic Device and the ability to use UMD to fake spell prereqs in item creation, is what allowed the Artificer to be so versatile in 3.5. Translating that to 4e WILL be difficult, because the designers appear to be making a concious effort to steer classes away from overlapping too much.
The 3.5 Artificer could do the Wizard's job of blasting with fireballs, scorching with rays, throwing up webs, giving out flight, etc, because he could make and use wands of those spells. This isn't an option as far as I can see in 4e. Wands are now Implements, rather than 50-charge spell containers. What I suggest is that the Artificer get SOME of that ability back, but severely reduced so that he cannot completely fill the role of another class any more.
Spell Storing Item, as I propose, is intended to let the Artificer pick up Magic Missile or Eldricht Blast if he plans (implying forethought) to throw a few long-distance strikes, but only a certain number of times. I suggest 4. I suspect At-Will powers will be used much more than 4 times in a typical day, but I'm open to the possibility of changing the mechanics from "At will, up to 4 times per day" to "Once per Encounter" to be more in line with the multiclass feats, the Half-Elf's ability, etc. This was mostly because I see the Artificer's At-will Attack powers as being rather weak or situational (ie: Inflict Structural Damage). Same goes for the Encounter version. It is written such that the ability becomes more like a Daily power you can use twice per day, since it's an Encounter power you can use twice per day, but only once per encounter. I don't see a problem with narrowing that down to Daily only. As for the Daily one, I'm open to the idea of removing it. I understand the need for classes to stand apart, and it was really only included for completion's sake. I even added the requirement for expensive material components, to make it more like quicker Item Creation. IF Item Creation lets you make items with Daily-level powers, giving higher level characters access to many Daily powers, then SSI (Daily) becomes a bit easier to swallow. 7 Daily powers is only one more than 6, after all. But if not, then yes, it's too much.
As for magic items = technology, okay, I can accept that. I was under the impression you were using the same conclusions I've seen elsewhere, that the Artificer belongs in a Tech power source because he makes steam engines and guns and mecha and chainsaws and clockwork war machines, when really he doesn't do that any more than a Wizard does. Sorry, my mistake. I should have known to expect better in the Eberron forum itself.
All this discussion of who gets what power source, (other than the Artificer) however, is really deserving of its own thread. I'm pretty sure there's some out there. I appreciate the effort you put into your arguments though, so I hope I don't appear dismissive. I just want to say though that I reach different conclusions from many of the quotes you mention. I'll leave it at that.
As for the Artificer temporarily duplicating magical items, he only really temporarily duplicates Wands. Superficially, I suppose, if he infuses Bull's Strength into a fighter's belt it's almost like a Belt of Giant Strength, but the same thing would happen if he infused his boots, his gloves, his hat, his shield, etc. The Artificer can't duplicate Boots of Speed or Iron Bands of Billaro or Immovable Rods. He can CRAFT them, but not whip them up on the spot with an infusion. Though that WOULD be pretty cool...
While I agree that the Artificer does focus a lot on Item Creation, it's still a bit of a stretch, to me, to put him in a Power Source entirely about Creation. Mostly because I disagree that the Creation source really exists. It sounds too limiting.
And I definately agree that many of the Artificer's abilities, in 3.5, were too slow to be effectively used in combat. As a result, they shouldn't fit into the Powers aspect of the class, being closer to Rituals, as you suggest, or some other Class Feature.
I agree that the Artificer could fill many roles in 3.5, and I believe that was due to his various fake-it abilities (Spell Storing Item, UMD Item creation). However, what can we do with an Artificer who hasn't got any money and is unwilling to spend all his daily infusions on Spell Storing Item? If he can't build wands, he can't blast. If he can't build wands, he can't eterni-buff. If he can't build wands, he can't spam healing. If he can't build his own magic gear of greater value than he'd normally have at this level, he's less effective in melee and ranged combat.
What he's left with is his infusions, right? What's on his infusion list? Predominantly buffs and "mess with item properties" effects, if I'm not mistaken. There's Blade Barrier and Wall of Iron at the end, but it's predominantly things like Armor Enhancement, Magic Weapon, Shield of Faith, Bull's Strength, etc.
A naked artificer is therefore, to me, a Leader. Same with a naked Fighter is still a Defender (albeit a significantly less effective one in 3.5). A naked Wizard is still a Controller/Striker/Leader (which they're narrowing down to Controller). Naked is probably the wrong term to use, but "Lacking Any Magic Gear" is not as evocative. I trust you get my meaning, though.
In order to remain "Artificery" however, they still need some fake-it ability. I think Spell Storing Item should be it, but I will gladly admit it needs some work first.
While I do congratulate you for trying to tackle the most difficult class that WotC will work on next year, please try to approach things from a 4.0 point of view instead of a 3.5 point of view. EI: Look at things from the DM's point of view instead of the player's point of view.
This is a first level aritificer at will power.
It does thunder damage (energy type).
It can be used as a basic attack (for AoO and so forth).
A wizards needs a Paragon Path to do something like this.
It does an average of (3.5+3.5 +(4 or 5 damage)) = 12
A Cleric (leader type) is likely to do (4.5 +4 damage) =8.5 and give a bonus to hit.
See lance of faith for details.
A Fighter (defender type) is likely to do (5.5 +5 damage) =10.5 with its basic attack that is vs. AC.
A Warlock (striker type) is likely to do (5.5 +4 (+3.5 Warlock's curse)) =13 damage but only on the enemy that was nearest them and cursed. This is not used as a basic attack.
Hence this ability is better than what all the other classes get at first level.
Adding to this is the ability to steal things from other classes without the harsher restriction that multiclassing allows. Multiclassing allows you to only get things from a single classs. And so far, at will powers become encounter power, encounter powers become daily powers. Daily powers might not be given out.
But in your class design, you are allowing a daily power from any other class to be used as a daily power in the artificer class.
In 4.0 the designers realized that D&D is a cooperative game and that play must be balanced at all costs. If even a single class outshines everything else then all the other classes will fall into neglect.
If an artificer can be versitle enough to take the place of another class and mimic all its talents, people will feel that their special class is not so special anymore. If an artificer can do anything you can do better who will play anything else? This is called "Class Protection" and it is a very important concept.
There's a typo in there on my part. Initially I had suggested Inflict Structural Damage be Thunder, but on reflection Force looked better. I remembered to change the keyword, but not the effect. Whoopsie.
Still, I compared this power to the 4e Wizard's Magic Missile.
MM vs. ISD
Range 20 vs Melee
2d4 + Int vs 2d6 + Int
Any creature vs Construct creature
Force vs Force
Ranged basic attack vs Melee basic attack
Magic Missile seems a much more desirable At-Will power to me. It's useable in many more situations, rather than being stuck solely in melee anti-construct duty. It's really more comparable in utility to the Cleric's Turn Undead, though the latter is a class feature AND other powers can be used instead of it (other Channel Divinities). Should this be a class feature instead, perhaps?
Moving on...
Regarding Spell Storing Item, it's still a definate work in progress and in need of some refining. Spell Storing Item, along with Use Magic Device and the ability to use UMD to fake spell prereqs in item creation, is what allowed the Artificer to be so versatile in 3.5. Translating that to 4e WILL be difficult, because the designers appear to be making a concious effort to steer classes away from overlapping too much.
The 3.5 Artificer could do the Wizard's job of blasting with fireballs, scorching with rays, throwing up webs, giving out flight, etc, because he could make and use wands of those spells. This isn't an option as far as I can see in 4e. Wands are now Implements, rather than 50-charge spell containers. What I suggest is that the Artificer get SOME of that ability back, but severely reduced so that he cannot completely fill the role of another class any more.
Spell Storing Item, as I propose, is intended to let the Artificer pick up Magic Missile or Eldricht Blast if he plans (implying forethought) to throw a few long-distance strikes, but only a certain number of times. I suggest 4. I suspect At-Will powers will be used much more than 4 times in a typical day, but I'm open to the possibility of changing the mechanics from "At will, up to 4 times per day" to "Once per Encounter" to be more in line with the multiclass feats, the Half-Elf's ability, etc. This was mostly because I see the Artificer's At-will Attack powers as being rather weak or situational (ie: Inflict Structural Damage). Same goes for the Encounter version. It is written such that the ability becomes more like a Daily power you can use twice per day, since it's an Encounter power you can use twice per day, but only once per encounter. I don't see a problem with narrowing that down to Daily only. As for the Daily one, I'm open to the idea of removing it. I understand the need for classes to stand apart, and it was really only included for completion's sake. I even added the requirement for expensive material components, to make it more like quicker Item Creation. IF Item Creation lets you make items with Daily-level powers, giving higher level characters access to many Daily powers, then SSI (Daily) becomes a bit easier to swallow. 7 Daily powers is only one more than 6, after all. But if not, then yes, it's too much.
As for magic items = technology, okay, I can accept that. I was under the impression you were using the same conclusions I've seen elsewhere, that the Artificer belongs in a Tech power source because he makes steam engines and guns and mecha and chainsaws and clockwork war machines, when really he doesn't do that any more than a Wizard does. Sorry, my mistake. I should have known to expect better in the Eberron forum itself.
All this discussion of who gets what power source, (other than the Artificer) however, is really deserving of its own thread. I'm pretty sure there's some out there. I appreciate the effort you put into your arguments though, so I hope I don't appear dismissive. I just want to say though that I reach different conclusions from many of the quotes you mention. I'll leave it at that.
As for the Artificer temporarily duplicating magical items, he only really temporarily duplicates Wands. Superficially, I suppose, if he infuses Bull's Strength into a fighter's belt it's almost like a Belt of Giant Strength, but the same thing would happen if he infused his boots, his gloves, his hat, his shield, etc. The Artificer can't duplicate Boots of Speed or Iron Bands of Billaro or Immovable Rods. He can CRAFT them, but not whip them up on the spot with an infusion. Though that WOULD be pretty cool...
While I agree that the Artificer does focus a lot on Item Creation, it's still a bit of a stretch, to me, to put him in a Power Source entirely about Creation. Mostly because I disagree that the Creation source really exists. It sounds too limiting.
And I definately agree that many of the Artificer's abilities, in 3.5, were too slow to be effectively used in combat. As a result, they shouldn't fit into the Powers aspect of the class, being closer to Rituals, as you suggest, or some other Class Feature.
I agree that the Artificer could fill many roles in 3.5, and I believe that was due to his various fake-it abilities (Spell Storing Item, UMD Item creation). However, what can we do with an Artificer who hasn't got any money and is unwilling to spend all his daily infusions on Spell Storing Item? If he can't build wands, he can't blast. If he can't build wands, he can't eterni-buff. If he can't build wands, he can't spam healing. If he can't build his own magic gear of greater value than he'd normally have at this level, he's less effective in melee and ranged combat.
What he's left with is his infusions, right? What's on his infusion list? Predominantly buffs and "mess with item properties" effects, if I'm not mistaken. There's Blade Barrier and Wall of Iron at the end, but it's predominantly things like Armor Enhancement, Magic Weapon, Shield of Faith, Bull's Strength, etc.
A naked artificer is therefore, to me, a Leader. Same with a naked Fighter is still a Defender (albeit a significantly less effective one in 3.5). A naked Wizard is still a Controller/Striker/Leader (which they're narrowing down to Controller). Naked is probably the wrong term to use, but "Lacking Any Magic Gear" is not as evocative. I trust you get my meaning, though.
In order to remain "Artificery" however, they still need some fake-it ability. I think Spell Storing Item should be it, but I will gladly admit it needs some work first.
While I agree that the Artificer does focus a lot on Item Creation, it's still a bit of a stretch, to me, to put him in a Power Source entirely about Creation. Mostly because I disagree that the Creation source really exists. It sounds too limiting.
I agree. I find too many people get focused on the line about how Artificers manipulate magic at a more "abstract" level. My (humble, of course) opinion, is that Artificers use the Arcane power source. It's simpler and doesn't add a power source leading to another suite of classes.
Show
I think the part of the reason for the previous segregation of the Artificer from Arcane and Divine spellcasters was because despite the Artificer, Wizard, and Cleric using "different" kinds of magic, they still worked like Spellcasters, rather than like Fighters, Barbarians, Rogues, etc. With every class using effectively the same rules, now (everybody gets X At will powers, Y Encounter powers, etc), the need for differentiation isn't really there any more. This is especially the case because we've seen no evidence of Scrolls, and thus the need to differentiate between Arcane/Divine/Neither spells.
Also: Updated Spell Storing Item, added a few powers, fixed up some of the formatting for the post
I agree. I find too many people get focused on the line about how Artificers manipulate magic at a more "abstract" level. My (humble, of course) opinion, is that Artificers use the Arcane power source. It's simpler and doesn't add a power source leading to another suite of classes.
I think the part of the reason for the previous segregation of the Artificer from Arcane and Divine spellcasters was because despite the Artificer, Wizard, and Cleric using "different" kinds of magic, they still worked like Spellcasters, rather than like Fighters, Barbarians, Rogues, etc. With every class using effectively the same rules, now (everybody gets X At will powers, Y Encounter powers, etc), the need for differentiation isn't really there any more. This is especially the case because we've seen no evidence of Scrolls, and thus the need to differentiate between Arcane/Divine/Neither spells.
Also: Updated Spell Storing Item, added a few powers, fixed up some of the formatting for the post
Flavorful Feats that Don’t Need to Clutter Basic Race Abilities: Some 3E races have laundry lists of abilities supplying situational benefits. In 4E, we have laundered those lists. Small situational benefits are great as feats that a player chooses because it suits their character concept, not as good as something that every player of a particular race has to keep track of. Here’s an example from the dwarf.
Dodge Giants [Dwarf]
Prerequisite: Dwarf
Benefit: You gain a +1 bonus to AC and Reflex defense against the attacks of Large or larger foes.
3E dwarves all ended up having AC bonuses against giants. 4E cuts this advantage out of the standard dwarf package and rephrases the advantage as a feat that can help dwarves against all bigger creatures, not just the few bigger creatures that happen to be actual giants.
Please notice the Designer’s thinking is changing from specific to generalized.
I think this is a trend that will be seen throughout the game.
I could give other examples, but the idea is to not leave the players in shut down situations.
Most races only get to pick 2 at will powers.
Creating a high damage at-will power that only works on a few things is bad.
This leaves the DM with the situation of worrying about providing a certain amount of your specific creatures which you will do better than everybody else at whether his campaign planned to include them or not.
A Magic Missile does 2d4 + Int = 2.5+2.5+(4 or 5) = total of 9 or 10
A Lance of Faith does 1d8 +Wis + (+2 to hit for one ally) = 4.5+(4 or 5)+(50% of 10% of (9 or 11)) = total of 9 or 10
This show how very balance 4.0 basic characters can be.
2d6 + Int = 3.5+3.5+(4 or 5) = total of 11 or 12
The best weapon is a Great Axe does 1d12 + Str = 6.5+(4 or 5)+(+1 if two handed) = total of 10.5 or 11.5 with a +1 bonus if you forgo the shield.
While the basic melee attack status seems less good than the Wizard’s basic ranged attack remember that all basic melee attacks can be used for AoO.
This is why looking at the big picture is important when designing characters.
Basically, I'm running out of ideas for Attack At-Will powers for our good ol' Artificer. Based on his 3.5 incarnation, he has very few, and they're all specialized as anti-construct. Specific-situation abilities still exist. The Cleric still gets Turn Undead, for example, though admittedly that's an Encounter Power that can be used in place of another Channel Divinity.
One possible fix to this is to make Inflict Structural Damage a Class Feature similar to Turn Undead. You use it in an encounter, OR you use a different encounter power instead. That way our Arty's at-wills aren't conditional-use.
Perhaps you could try this:
Channel Repairs:
Class Feature – Encounter Power – Standard Action – Range Touch - Attack vs. Ref.
Any construct you touch can be repaired by using a healing surge for free and +1d6 +Int Mod.
{This power can be reversed in order to cause 1d6+Int Mod damage to a construct. If you expend one of your healing surges when you do this, you can add its healing value to the damage done.}
As far as actual game mechanics go, I haven't really seen the effect of Power Source other than categorizing classes based on overall theme. Martial characters utilize extensive physical conditioning, willpower, weapon technique, and so on to perform acts bordering on the superhuman. Divine characters directly wield the influence of a higher supernatural power on its behalf. Arcane characters delve into the fundamental mysteries of the universe, either through personal study or being "taught" in a way by a more knowledgeable entity, and use this understanding to produce effects normally beyond normal physical possibility.
So how does this actually play into gameplay mechanics? I haven't seen anywhere. 4e seems to be veering away from previous editions classification of classes as "Magic" (Wizard, Bard, Cleric, Druid, etc) and "Not Magic" (Fighter, Barbarian, Rogue), since let's face it, a high level Fighter (with his incredible skill at arms and ability to FALL FROM SPACE WITHOUT DYING) was pretty damn magical, even if Antimagic Field didn't nullify anything he could do.
So, what does this have to do with the Artificer? Well, he needs a Power Source. Despite the previous edition's segregation of the Artificer from Arcane and Divine spellcasting, it sounds to me like the Artificer would actually work rather well as an Arcane character. Please hear me out.
As far as I can tell, Arcane characters use their fundamental understanding of "how the universe works" or "the nature of magic" or whatever to provide their powers. That's really what the Artificer does, isn't it?
This is partly because of the shift away from the Vancian system of magic, and the changing of the nature of wands and other traditional magic items. Unlike previous editions where the wand allowed its wielder to cast X spell Y number of times before being depleted, the wand is now an implement that improves the powers of its Wizard wielder. Maybe the Warlock too, though she might get her own implements. And scrolls, it seems, aren't even there.
I'm rambling somewhat and I apologize. The point I'm trying to make is that Now that the Artificer's traditional means of "casting the other guy's spells" is no longer there, the differentiation between artifice and other magic isn't really necessary. So putting the Artificer into the Arcane power source doesn't really go against any of the Artificer's flavor.
This, however, may cause problems if there are specific gameplay mechanics attached to the Arcane power source that do not fit in with the idea of the Artificer. I'm unsure what they could be, but I am open to the possibility that they may be there.
If that were the case, I would be perfectly willing to accept the creation of an Artifice power source. It would even let the Artificer differentiate his powers (or Infusions) from the powers of the Arcane (or Spells). Again, if different power sources provide different gameplay mechanics then there'd need to be some work here.
This one's a toughy. One of the fundamental ideas of the Artificer is ability to "fake it." An Artificer can be a reasonable melee or ranged combatant using personal buffs, though arguably not as good as a full-on fighter or similar class without dipping into external sources like Persistant Spell. An Artificer can be a competant trap-monkey provided he invests in the necessary skills. Using various metamagic feats and Metamagic Spell Trigger or similar abilities the Artificer can lay the spell-casting smackdown with wands and scrolls, rivalling the Wizard and other traditional spellcasters. If the Artificer invests the resources necessary to stockpile various wands and scrolls he can serve adequately as the walking band-aid dispenser, a role typically reserved solely for the Cleric.
All of this makes the Artificer a difficult fit for 4e's more concrete concept of Roles and its greater focus on specialization. While a 3e Fighter could be an arguably superior ranged combatant to a Ranger, the same is not true in 4e. Similarly, the Artificer should not be capable of filling more than one role with any degree of reliability.
Overlap between a class's role and others does exist, however. A Paladin, for example, displays occasional Leader-like qualities. Similarly, a Rogue may occasionally act like a Defender, or a Wizard a Striker, or a Cleric a Controller, and so on. So I think there's precedence there to make the Artificer capable of doing a bit more.
Now, having said that, let's look at what the Artificer is capable "out of the box." No magic items, no feats from splatbooks, not even faking any spells from other classes, no nothing. What have we got?
- An Artificer is really the only one who can reliably repair constructs.
- An Artificer can find ways around the restrictions placed on magic item usage ("you no longer have to be of race X or possess class feature Y"), or modify the item's properties such that they are more beneficial ("Your Ring of Protection now gives a natural armor bonus, so it'll stack with this Ioun Stone").
- An Artificer is, as far as I can tell, the best buffer in the business. Many of the the good traditional ones (Bull's Strength et al and Shield of Faith come to mind) along with some new goldies (Skill boosting item?) are on his Infusion list.
All of this put together, in my eyes, makes the Artificer fit best into the role of Leader. Unlike the Warlord, who provides his allies with greater tactical opportunities, the Artificer would behave more like the Cleric, who typically provides static bonuses or other benefits. I'm not sure how best to manage that, however, since so far it seems to me that all the Cleric's buffing powers rely on him smacking an enemy first, which doesn't really fit well with the idea of the Artificer imbuing magical effects into his party's equipment.
Now, I'm aware that the 3e artificer can moonlight as a "controller"-type character, or a "striker", given the right equipment. I think it should still be possible for the 4e Artificer to do a little of that as well, but admitedly not to the same extent. That I shall cover under Class Abilities.
At this point in time we've seen much of the Rogue and Warlord when it comes to the basics.
From those, I suggest the following:
Class Traits
Role: Leader. Your magic protects and bolsters your companions, and hinders your opponents. (Discussion above)
Power Source: Arcane. Your talents depend on your fundamental and abstract understanding of the nature of magic and the universe. Rather than creating energy and matter from nothing, you focus more on temporary enhancements to your and your allies' equipment. (Discussion above)
Key Abilities: Intelligence, 2 more. (Discussion below)
Armor Proficiencies: Cloth, leather, hide, chainmail; light shield
Weapon Proficiencies: Simple melee, simple ranged
Bonus to Defense: +2 Will
Hit Points at 1st Level: 12 + Constitution score
Hit Points per Level Gained: 5
Healing Surges per Day: 7 + Constitution modifier
Trained Skills: Arcana, plus 4 more. From the class skills list below, choose four trained skills at 1st level.
Class Skills: Arcana (Int), Dungeoneering (Wis), Endurance (Con), Heal (Wis), History (Int), Perception (Wis), Thievery (Dex)
Build Options: (Discussion below)
Class Features: (Discussion below)
Power Source: Arcane. Your talents depend on your fundamental and abstract understanding of the nature of magic and the universe. Rather than creating energy and matter from nothing, you focus more on temporary enhancements to your and your allies' equipment. (Discussion above)
Key Abilities: Intelligence, 2 more. (Discussion below)
Armor Proficiencies: Cloth, leather, hide, chainmail; light shield
Weapon Proficiencies: Simple melee, simple ranged
Bonus to Defense: +2 Will
Hit Points at 1st Level: 12 + Constitution score
Hit Points per Level Gained: 5
Healing Surges per Day: 7 + Constitution modifier
Trained Skills: Arcana, plus 4 more. From the class skills list below, choose four trained skills at 1st level.
Class Skills: Arcana (Int), Dungeoneering (Wis), Endurance (Con), Heal (Wis), History (Int), Perception (Wis), Thievery (Dex)
Build Options: (Discussion below)
Class Features: (Discussion below)
Even though I propose the Artificer be able to "borrow" powers from other classes with Spell Storing Item, he still needs powers of his own.
Personal thoughts re: Artificer Powers
First off, I don't think the Artificer should have many "Attack vs. Reflex, if hit deal XdY damage" powers of his own. That's what Spell Storing Item is for. You steal the Wizard's Magic Missile or something if you need to do that. Otherwise, you've got a crossbow or morningstar (preferably magicked up). Any attack spells like that he does have should be similar to those he has in 3.5. Namely, the anti-construct infusions. Disable Construct should function like 4e's Harm, should it make the cut, for example. Also, don't forget Artificer's get Blade Barrier and assorted Walls (Iron and Force, I believe), so he can be a bit of a Controller if he wants to, even without Spell Storing Item.
Having said that, though, there's At-Will power slots to be filled, and nobody else's wands to fill 'em. Perhaps the Magic of Eberron infusion Blast Rod can be modified to accomodate? More on that later.
Mostly, I think the Artificer's powers should be predominantly buffs. How those sorts of things are going to work in 4e I'm not really sure. Looking at the sample Cleric from the DDXP, it seems like 1-minute/caster level buffs aren't as prevalent, or even in the game at all. Usually you have to smack something first, then give an ally a benefit as a side-effect.
If that's the way the Cleric is doing things, I think the Artificer could do them differently, just to differentiate the two classes. 4e seems to be moving away from "wasting" actions buffing or healing, though (what with Healing Word and Lay on Hands being made minor actions), so I propose that most buffs the Artificer's giving should be done as minor actions, with any REALLY good ones (ie: Mass Shield of Faith, preferably renamed to, I don't know, Mass Deflection Shield or something), done as Standard. I don't see this as being a problem, except some mechanic should probably be implemented to ensure that Artificer's aren't walking around with their party continually-buffed, if that's a problem.
To prevent the possibility of an eterni-buff state, it would probably be best if the majority of the Artificer's buffs are Encounter powers with a duration less than 5 minutes. Any At-Will buffs would probably have to have a duration of very few rounds indeed. Perhaps they need to be sustained? I like that option.
I'm also noticing that we're probably going to have to come up with some Attack powers for the Artificer, due to the segregation of attack and utility powers in 4e. Any thoughts? I'm thinking we'll see Smite-like effects representing the Artificer doing quicky-infusions on his weapon that only last one round. I don't really see many other ways of giving the Artificer enough Attack powers to let him use the same rules as everybody else.
Looking at the Artificer's Infusion list, there aren't a whole lot of "attack" spells. Many of his infusions would be most adequately represented as Rituals anyway. Armor Enhancement, Suppress Requirement, Item Alteration, Weapon Augmentation, Fabricate, Major Creation, Move Earth, and so on. If not Rituals, perhaps Class Features. In fact, Class Features may be the best way to represent many of the Artificer's abilities. One of the Artificer's perks is access to all his infusions all the time (rather than just the ones you've memorized, or just the ones in a subset of known spells).
Having said that, though, there's At-Will power slots to be filled, and nobody else's wands to fill 'em. Perhaps the Magic of Eberron infusion Blast Rod can be modified to accomodate? More on that later.
Mostly, I think the Artificer's powers should be predominantly buffs. How those sorts of things are going to work in 4e I'm not really sure. Looking at the sample Cleric from the DDXP, it seems like 1-minute/caster level buffs aren't as prevalent, or even in the game at all. Usually you have to smack something first, then give an ally a benefit as a side-effect.
If that's the way the Cleric is doing things, I think the Artificer could do them differently, just to differentiate the two classes. 4e seems to be moving away from "wasting" actions buffing or healing, though (what with Healing Word and Lay on Hands being made minor actions), so I propose that most buffs the Artificer's giving should be done as minor actions, with any REALLY good ones (ie: Mass Shield of Faith, preferably renamed to, I don't know, Mass Deflection Shield or something), done as Standard. I don't see this as being a problem, except some mechanic should probably be implemented to ensure that Artificer's aren't walking around with their party continually-buffed, if that's a problem.
To prevent the possibility of an eterni-buff state, it would probably be best if the majority of the Artificer's buffs are Encounter powers with a duration less than 5 minutes. Any At-Will buffs would probably have to have a duration of very few rounds indeed. Perhaps they need to be sustained? I like that option.
I'm also noticing that we're probably going to have to come up with some Attack powers for the Artificer, due to the segregation of attack and utility powers in 4e. Any thoughts? I'm thinking we'll see Smite-like effects representing the Artificer doing quicky-infusions on his weapon that only last one round. I don't really see many other ways of giving the Artificer enough Attack powers to let him use the same rules as everybody else.
Looking at the Artificer's Infusion list, there aren't a whole lot of "attack" spells. Many of his infusions would be most adequately represented as Rituals anyway. Armor Enhancement, Suppress Requirement, Item Alteration, Weapon Augmentation, Fabricate, Major Creation, Move Earth, and so on. If not Rituals, perhaps Class Features. In fact, Class Features may be the best way to represent many of the Artificer's abilities. One of the Artificer's perks is access to all his infusions all the time (rather than just the ones you've memorized, or just the ones in a subset of known spells).
Reply to makeshiftwings
I agree that as the norm, the whole "15 minutes of study just to choose the same spells you had yesterday" idea is gone. The thing with the artificer, though, is that one of his defining aspects is his ability to "fake it."
But how's he going to do that now? Scrolls appear to be out. Wands and staves can't do it anymore. The only thing that's left is Spell Storing Item. And since that is rather limited (only Encounter powers with the Implement keyword) and since the Artificer's the only one who can do it, I don't see it as much of a problem.
But that's just me. Your opinion differs, obviously.
Any thoughts on what ability might substitute?
I haven't read all of your post (sorry ;) ), but I have a feeling spell-storing item and anything similar will be gone for 4e. The designers are trying to change the game so that all players have a small list of powers that they can use more often. They want to avoid situations in 3e where "resting" means everyone flipping through ten different splatbooks for an hour and a half trying to pick the perfect spell. Letting the artificer pick any power from any class from any book every day is exactly the sort of thing they seem to be trying to avoid. Remember that even the wizard and cleric no longer have access to a big spell list. They pick a few spells, and that's it. The wizard gets to choose between two every day, not five million. Scouring splatbooks for the most uber power only happens between games, when you level, not during the game. The artificer will likely be the same. I have a feeling he won't be able to freely scribe tons of scrolls and wands from other classes either.
I agree that as the norm, the whole "15 minutes of study just to choose the same spells you had yesterday" idea is gone. The thing with the artificer, though, is that one of his defining aspects is his ability to "fake it."
But how's he going to do that now? Scrolls appear to be out. Wands and staves can't do it anymore. The only thing that's left is Spell Storing Item. And since that is rather limited (only Encounter powers with the Implement keyword) and since the Artificer's the only one who can do it, I don't see it as much of a problem.
But that's just me. Your opinion differs, obviously.
Any thoughts on what ability might substitute?
I agree that as the norm, the whole "15 minutes of study just to choose the same spells you had yesterday" idea is gone. The thing with the artificer, though, is that one of his defining aspects is his ability to "fake it."
But how's he going to do that now? Scrolls appear to be out. Wands and staves can't do it anymore. The only thing that's left is Spell Storing Item. And since that is rather limited (only Encounter powers with the Implement keyword) and since the Artificer's the only one who can do it, I don't see it as much of a problem.
But that's just me. Your opinion differs, obviously.
Any thoughts on what ability might substitute?
Well, back in 3e, one could say that the defining aspect of the wizard/cleric/druid was having a massive list of spells to choose from. Or that the defining element of Polymorph was being able to use any ability from any monster book, etc. But those things will all be gone in 4e. I don't think the artificer will have the defining element of being able to fake all spells anymore. I don't think full access to other classes' spell lists was a huge part of his "fluff" identity in 3e anyway; it just happened to be one of the many super-abusable things he could do, and thus became very popular. I think the most defining fluff aspects of the artificer was that he was a "gadgeteer" of sorts; that he could make, use and modify magic items really well. I think he could still be able to make magic items well, between game sessions. I don't think he'll be able to spontaneously access a ton of things ranging across tons of books mid-combat.
I think the whole reason scrolls and wands are gone or different is part of what I was saying; they are trying to stop people from having easy access to fifty different spells in combat. That's exactly why I don't think the artificer will be able to do it either. And I can't agree with the idea that "since the Artificer's the only one who can do it, I don't see it as much of a problem"... if the artificer is the only one that can do this massively powerful and potentially game-breaking thing, then it makes all the other classes weak in comparison.
I don't think he'll have anything to substitute, and I don't think he needs it. I'd still have fun playing an artificer even if he was limited just to his own list of powers. I don't need to be able to access the wizard and cleric lists. If he needed one, maybe he could have an ability like "Mimic", which would let him use a power that someone else in his party has. That way you are limited in scope, can't bring in arbitrary things from other books, plus, you can just glance over at the other person's character sheet to see what the ability does rather than needing to look it up in combat.
Reply to makeshiftwings
The problem with trimming down the Artificer to the "gadgeteer" aspect is that from what I've seen of 4e that's not really an option anymore anyway. This is namely due to the lack of spell-trigger or spell-completion items like wands, staves, and scrolls. The Artificer could make, use, and modify magic items really well, but if you take out the above, what's left? The Fighter is better with magic weapons anyway, even without Attune Magic Weapon, and Wonderous Items work the same for everybody. 4e seems to be shifting its focus away from magic items anyway, making a class focussed around messing with existing ones even less viable.
There's very little "aggressive" stuff in the 3.5 Arty's infusion list. Mostly, it's reserved for anti-construct duty, AND he doesn't need to memorize a potentially useless infusion in order to use them. Crafting and using someone else's wands and scrolls, and faking the occasional spell were the main ways an Artificer could actually hold his own. If we take out the ability for the Artificer to do things on his own, then he becomes a 3e bard: A character that everyone likes having around, but nobody wants to play. But if we start giving him big spells of his own, he really ceases to be an Artificer.
That's only if Spell Storing Item is massively powerful and potentially game-breaking. In 3.5 I don't think it was, though admittedly that may because I haven't seen what Char Ops could theoretically do with it. As far as I recall, the Artificer's main Char Ops schtick was Metamagic Spell Trigger, various twinned/admixtured/etc metamagic feats, and splatbook spells of questionable balance in the first place.
As written, Spell Storing Item let's the Artificer use 1 Encounter Implement power of another class as a Daily power. I haven't played any 4e yet, so I'm definately not an authority on this sort of thing, but to me that doesn't sound too powerful. Especially if it gets limited somehow such that ol' Arty must choose lower-level powers. Or perhaps there's a max-level limit? The 3.5 infusion has an upper level limit, doesn't it?
I have a few problems with the "Mimic" ability you suggest. Firstly, there's not really any precedence for that in the Artificer. He hasn't been previously bound to what his buddies have available. Secondly, if all the Arty can do is mimic his buddies, he's not bringing anything new to the table. That may cut down on book-keeping or time spent searching through books, but in doing so the Arty can't HELP but step on his buddies' toes. I would expect Spell Storing Item would be used to try to remedy a deficiency the party already has (ie: We have a Wizard but he only has big damaging spells, no status effects, so I'll pick up Slow or something), rather than adding to an existing strength.
Perhaps it's worth specifying a list of viable Spell Storing Item powers that the Arty must choose from, predominantly from the PHB? That way our Arty has a go-to list and it prevents rules from exterior sources from unbalancing play. "Choose a power from this list."
There's very little "aggressive" stuff in the 3.5 Arty's infusion list. Mostly, it's reserved for anti-construct duty, AND he doesn't need to memorize a potentially useless infusion in order to use them. Crafting and using someone else's wands and scrolls, and faking the occasional spell were the main ways an Artificer could actually hold his own. If we take out the ability for the Artificer to do things on his own, then he becomes a 3e bard: A character that everyone likes having around, but nobody wants to play. But if we start giving him big spells of his own, he really ceases to be an Artificer.
...if the artificer is the only one that can do this massively powerful and potentially game-breaking thing, then it makes all the other classes weak in comparison.
That's only if Spell Storing Item is massively powerful and potentially game-breaking. In 3.5 I don't think it was, though admittedly that may because I haven't seen what Char Ops could theoretically do with it. As far as I recall, the Artificer's main Char Ops schtick was Metamagic Spell Trigger, various twinned/admixtured/etc metamagic feats, and splatbook spells of questionable balance in the first place.
As written, Spell Storing Item let's the Artificer use 1 Encounter Implement power of another class as a Daily power. I haven't played any 4e yet, so I'm definately not an authority on this sort of thing, but to me that doesn't sound too powerful. Especially if it gets limited somehow such that ol' Arty must choose lower-level powers. Or perhaps there's a max-level limit? The 3.5 infusion has an upper level limit, doesn't it?
I have a few problems with the "Mimic" ability you suggest. Firstly, there's not really any precedence for that in the Artificer. He hasn't been previously bound to what his buddies have available. Secondly, if all the Arty can do is mimic his buddies, he's not bringing anything new to the table. That may cut down on book-keeping or time spent searching through books, but in doing so the Arty can't HELP but step on his buddies' toes. I would expect Spell Storing Item would be used to try to remedy a deficiency the party already has (ie: We have a Wizard but he only has big damaging spells, no status effects, so I'll pick up Slow or something), rather than adding to an existing strength.
Perhaps it's worth specifying a list of viable Spell Storing Item powers that the Arty must choose from, predominantly from the PHB? That way our Arty has a go-to list and it prevents rules from exterior sources from unbalancing play. "Choose a power from this list."
Reply to makeshiftwingsThe problem with trimming down the Artificer to the "gadgeteer" aspect is that from what I've seen of 4e that's not really an option anymore anyway. This is namely due to the lack of spell-trigger or spell-completion items like wands, staves, and scrolls. The Artificer could make, use, and modify magic items really well, but if you take out the above, what's left? The Fighter is better with magic weapons anyway, even without Attune Magic Weapon, and Wonderous Items work the same for everybody. 4e seems to be shifting its focus away from magic items anyway, making a class focussed around messing with existing ones even less viable.
It is shifting away from magic items being super-important, but they're still important. I think the artificer may spend more time buffing others' magic equipment instead of just his own (he is a Leader in your example). I think he could be given fast ranged infusions; maybe he uses a wand implement like a wizard and warlock now. He could add Flaming to the fighter's sword one turn, and then add Concealment to the rogue's armor the next turn. Or maybe he could borrow some mechanics from Incarnum, and create "temporary" magic items out of mundane things that fit into one of the body slots, like a Close Burst infusion that turns all the party members' boots into boots of striding and springing for the duration of the encounter. He could have attacks that temporarily stop an opponent's magic items from functioning, or that temporarily turn one of their items into a cursed item. (Amulet of Health becomes Amulet of Strangulation ;) )There's very little "aggressive" stuff in the 3.5 Arty's infusion list. Mostly, it's reserved for anti-construct duty, AND he doesn't need to memorize a potentially useless infusion in order to use them. Crafting and using someone else's wands and scrolls, and faking the occasional spell were the main ways an Artificer could actually hold his own. If we take out the ability for the Artificer to do things on his own, then he becomes a 3e bard: A character that everyone likes having around, but nobody wants to play. But if we start giving him big spells of his own, he really ceases to be an Artificer.
I guess I don't see it that way. If he's a Leader, his best powers will be things that help other people, not himself. A Leader doesn't need to hold his own in damage output; that's why he has the rest of the party. And let's not forget that all classes have the same BAB now, so the artificer will still be pretty useful in melee, like a cleric or warlord. Also, I think he can have big spells of his own; I think he'll have to. I don't think they're going to let him cherry pick big powers from any book whenever he wants. That wasn't an important part of his fluff in my opinion.That's only if Spell Storing Item is massively powerful and potentially game-breaking. In 3.5 I don't think it was, though admittedly that may because I haven't seen what Char Ops could theoretically do with it. As far as I recall, the Artificer's main Char Ops schtick was Metamagic Spell Trigger, various twinned/admixtured/etc metamagic feats, and splatbook spells of questionable balance in the first place.
The ability to grab any power from a list of a thousand powers whenever you need it is very powerful. It didn't seem powerful in 3e because there were many classes that could do it (Cleric and Druid especially). But in 4e, no one else can do that. All the powers have been designed around the idea that you pick about five that you know, and that's all you have. You can only change them when you level up, and then you lose your old ones.As written, Spell Storing Item let's the Artificer use 1 Encounter Implement power of another class as a Daily power. I haven't played any 4e yet, so I'm definately not an authority on this sort of thing, but to me that doesn't sound too powerful. Especially if it gets limited somehow such that ol' Arty must choose lower-level powers. Or perhaps there's a max-level limit? The 3.5 infusion has an upper level limit, doesn't it?
The freedom to choose from a hundred powers on-demand (five hundred once a few splatbooks are released) will more than make up for being limited to lower level powers. At least it definitely looks that way to me. Look at multiclassing: you don't even get to pick new powers; you have to give up some of your original powers and trade them in. One of the human's "best qualities" is that he gets to learn one extra at-will power. Giving the artificer access to tons of powers seems like a very bad idea. And as I said, aside from just the power of it, it encourages the player scouring through every book he owns constantly during battle to find the one perfect spell. They're trying to move away from that and make it faster; they reccommend putting each of your abilities on cards and having them all in front of you so that you never need to look anything up. In the 4e sample I played, turns went much faster, and there are many more turns in a typical battle. Having a player who gets to pick from every book on his turn could result in massive slow down. Having three artificers in the group sounds almost unplayable.I have a few problems with the "Mimic" ability you suggest. Firstly, there's not really any precedence for that in the Artificer. He hasn't been previously bound to what his buddies have available. Secondly, if all the Arty can do is mimic his buddies, he's not bringing anything new to the table. That may cut down on book-keeping or time spent searching through books, but in doing so the Arty can't HELP but step on his buddies' toes. I would expect Spell Storing Item would be used to try to remedy a deficiency the party already has (ie: We have a Wizard but he only has big damaging spells, no status effects, so I'll pick up Slow or something), rather than adding to an existing strength.
Well, like I said, there wasn't any precedence for fighters and rogues being able to use cool powers, or precedence for wizards to have to use implements, or precedence for warlocks having three different pacts. A lot has changed in the new edition, so I would expect a lot will change for the artificer as well. I also don't think the artificer should be allowed to pick a big spell from outside his role (like Slow, a Controller spell), unless he multiclasses. Letting the artificer use any spell from any role hurts the importance of the four roles. If the party is saying "The wizard only has damaging spells, we need more Control", then either the wizard should stop trying to be a Striker and take more Control spells, or the party should get another Controller. Or they should deal with being a damage-heavy, control-light party. If the artificer can make up for any role, than he becomes the most useful class in the game.Perhaps it's worth specifying a list of viable Spell Storing Item powers that the Arty must choose from, predominantly from the PHB? That way our Arty has a go-to list and it prevents rules from exterior sources from unbalancing play. "Choose a power from this list."
The problem with trimming down the Artificer to the "gadgeteer" aspect is that from what I've seen of 4e that's not really an option anymore anyway. This is namely due to the lack of spell-trigger or spell-completion items like wands, staves, and scrolls. The Artificer could make, use, and modify magic items really well, but if you take out the above, what's left? The Fighter is better with magic weapons anyway, even without Attune Magic Weapon, and Wonderous Items work the same for everybody. 4e seems to be shifting its focus away from magic items anyway, making a class focussed around messing with existing ones even less viable.
I agree, it is shifting away from magic items being super-important, but they're still important. I think the artificer may spend more time buffing others' magic equipment instead of just his own (he is a Leader in your example). I think he could be given fast ranged infusions; maybe he uses a wand implement like a wizard and warlock now. He could add Flaming to the fighter's sword one turn, and then add Concealment to the rogue's armor the next turn. Or maybe he could borrow some mechanics from Incarnum, and create "temporary" magic items out of mundane things that fit into one of the body slots, like a Close Burst infusion that turns all the party members' boots into boots of striding and springing for the duration of the encounter. He could have attacks that temporarily stop an opponent's magic items from functioning, or that temporarily turn one of their items into a cursed item. (Amulet of Health becomes Amulet of Strangulation ;) )
There's very little "aggressive" stuff in the 3.5 Arty's infusion list. Mostly, it's reserved for anti-construct duty, AND he doesn't need to memorize a potentially useless infusion in order to use them. Crafting and using someone else's wands and scrolls, and faking the occasional spell were the main ways an Artificer could actually hold his own. If we take out the ability for the Artificer to do things on his own, then he becomes a 3e bard: A character that everyone likes having around, but nobody wants to play. But if we start giving him big spells of his own, he really ceases to be an Artificer.
I guess I don't see it that way. If he's a Leader, his best powers will be things that help other people, not himself. A Leader doesn't need to hold his own in damage output; that's why he has the rest of the party. And let's not forget that all classes have the same BAB now, so the artificer will still be pretty useful in melee, like a cleric or warlord. Also, I think he can have big spells of his own; I think he'll have to. I don't think they're going to let him cherry pick big powers from any book whenever he wants. That wasn't an important part of his fluff in my opinion.
That's only if Spell Storing Item is massively powerful and potentially game-breaking. In 3.5 I don't think it was, though admittedly that may because I haven't seen what Char Ops could theoretically do with it. As far as I recall, the Artificer's main Char Ops schtick was Metamagic Spell Trigger, various twinned/admixtured/etc metamagic feats, and splatbook spells of questionable balance in the first place.
The ability to grab any power from a list of a thousand powers whenever you need it is very powerful. It didn't seem powerful in 3e because there were many classes that could do it (Cleric and Druid especially). But in 4e, no one else can do that. All the powers have been designed around the idea that you pick about five that you know, and that's all you have. You can only change them when you level up, and then you lose your old ones.
As written, Spell Storing Item let's the Artificer use 1 Encounter Implement power of another class as a Daily power. I haven't played any 4e yet, so I'm definately not an authority on this sort of thing, but to me that doesn't sound too powerful. Especially if it gets limited somehow such that ol' Arty must choose lower-level powers. Or perhaps there's a max-level limit? The 3.5 infusion has an upper level limit, doesn't it?
The freedom to choose from a hundred powers on-demand (five hundred once a few splatbooks are released) will more than make up for being limited to lower level powers. At least it definitely looks that way to me. Look at multiclassing: you don't even get to pick new powers; you have to give up some of your original powers and trade them in. One of the human's "best qualities" is that he gets to learn one extra at-will power. Giving the artificer access to tons of powers seems like a very bad idea. And as I said, aside from just the power of it, it encourages the player scouring through every book he owns constantly during battle to find the one perfect spell. They're trying to move away from that and make it faster; they reccommend putting each of your abilities on cards and having them all in front of you so that you never need to look anything up. In the 4e sample I played, turns went much faster, and there are many more turns in a typical battle. Having a player who gets to pick from every book on his turn could result in massive slow down. Having three artificers in the group sounds almost unplayable.
I have a few problems with the "Mimic" ability you suggest. Firstly, there's not really any precedence for that in the Artificer. He hasn't been previously bound to what his buddies have available. Secondly, if all the Arty can do is mimic his buddies, he's not bringing anything new to the table. That may cut down on book-keeping or time spent searching through books, but in doing so the Arty can't HELP but step on his buddies' toes. I would expect Spell Storing Item would be used to try to remedy a deficiency the party already has (ie: We have a Wizard but he only has big damaging spells, no status effects, so I'll pick up Slow or something), rather than adding to an existing strength.
Well, like I said, there wasn't any precedence for fighters and rogues being able to use cool powers, or precedence for wizards to have to use implements, or precedence for warlocks having three different pacts. A lot has changed in the new edition, so I would expect a lot will change for the artificer as well. I also don't think the artificer should be allowed to pick a big spell from outside his role (like Slow, a Controller spell), unless he multiclasses. Letting the artificer use any spell from any role hurts the importance of the four roles. If the party is saying "The wizard only has damaging spells, we need more Control", then either the wizard should stop trying to be a Striker and take more Control spells, or the party should get another Controller. Or they should deal with being a damage-heavy, control-light party. If the artificer can make up for any role, than he becomes the most useful class in the game.
Perhaps it's worth specifying a list of viable Spell Storing Item powers that the Arty must choose from, predominantly from the PHB? That way our Arty has a go-to list and it prevents rules from exterior sources from unbalancing play. "Choose a power from this list."[/sblock]
That would be better, in my opinion. Still, at that point it seems almost the same as just giving the artificer his own list of similar powers that are more balanced to fit in his role (Leader, for example). I also think an encounter power that says "You can use any of these five other encounter powers" is by definition more powerful than the other classes, who are limited to picking just one of those five other encounter powers alone. We haven't seen any powers yet that say "You can do this or this or this or this or this"; they're all specific and focused.
Reply to makeshiftwings, sblocked for compression's sake
The various "equipment buff" powers are good ideas as far as I can tell. Not struck on the incarnum-esque idea, though.
But modifying opponents' gear is iffy all 'round. I had initially thought about something similar (negating an enemy's magic items, etc), but there might be several problems with that. Mostly, it's fairly specific in it's implementation. If the enemy has no magic items, it does nothing. This wouldn't be a problem in 3.5, since the Arty can cast a different infusion instead. But in 4e, you only get so many powers, and there's little opportunity to switch them out on the fly. We haven't seen a spontaneous caster yet, and I expect we never will.
IF WotC introduces a spontaneous-power 3e-Sorceror-esque class, then I think the Artificer should follow similar rules. But I'm hesitant to make up an entirely new mechanic on my own for that for now.
The thing is, though, WotC seems to be making a concious effort to allow every class the ability to contribute to combat through more than buffing other people. The cleric, from what I've seen for example, gets a bunch of attack powers that HAPPEN to provide benefits to his allies. No more does your "Leader" do nothing but buff his buddies while THEY do the cool stuff (ie: defeat enemies).
There's not a whole lot a bare-bones Artificer could do towards that. The majority of his infusions would be classified as "Utility Powers" or "Rituals" now. Before, if the Arty wanted to do anything other than hide behind someone else and hope THEY do well he needed wands and scrolls of other classes' spells. I suppose he's going to need plenty of his own powers now in order to do that.
I think there's a misunderstanding here. I'm not suggesting our Arty be able to use Spell Storing Item every round, "on demand" as it were. I don't even think he should be able to do it during combat, albeit in extreme circumstances. It was intended as a "prep" power, like it was in 3.5. You cast it when you have a full minute of peace, and THEN use the imbued item when appropriate. It shouldn't arise that the Artificer is bogging down play as he sifts through sourcebooks, since he can only do it once per rest.
Perhaps an ability similar to the Wizard's Spellbook is a better idea? The Artificer "knows" a number of powers, and can use those ones?
From what I've seen, a lot of what Rogues and Fighters, for example, get power-wise are simply translations of previous edition abilities into the new power system. Cleave, Sneak Attack, Tumble, etc. Granted there's a lot of new ones, but they're all easily acceptable given the fluff of previous classes. I have no problem accepting a charismatic Rogue being able to trick an enemy into stumbling to a new location. Really, it's just a variation on Improved Feint, a Rogue staple. If the Rogue somehow developed the ability to fling fireballs or shoot eye lazers I'd have a bit more difficulty. Similarly, the Artificer has always been the guy who uses someone else's spells. I'm growing to accept that that may not be the case anymore, however.
Firstly, just like to point out it wouldn't even be a DAILY power that says "you can use any of these encounter powers." Rather, it would be a class ability in a similar vein to the Wizard's spellbook. At the start of the day you choose one Encounter Ability of someone else, and may use it as a Daily. If it turns out you chose something tactically unsound (ie Fireball, but all you do is fight Azers) then tough. If you were to save it, however, for later in the day, you could use it reactively, albeit delayed. Buddy turned to stone? If you wait around long enough, perhaps you could whip out a Stone to Flesh. Though in retrospect StF would probably be a ritual. Regardless, I expect you understand the idea. Perhaps you identify somehow what challenges you're likely to face, and can prepare accordingly.
And the idea wasn't so that the Artificer could replace another role. It's just one Encounter power (done as a Daily). It's like having an extra magic item power. It was just so that the Artificer could provide a small remedy by "having just the thing" or what-have-you. All the classes appear to have this versatility to some degree, what with the various Leader-like qualities of the Paladin, the Striker-ish nature of some Fighter powers, etc. This was an attempt to provide something similar to the Artificer, though admittedly a little better, because versatility was kinda his thing.
Okay, so, suppose we scrap Spell Storing Item. How would the Artificer retain his gadgeteer qualities? Perhaps various "interrupt" powers that affect how he uses magic item powers? I've tried to include a few powers like that already, what with Weapon Surge and Power Surge. If he has a Circlet of Blasting, maybe he could expend Empower Item when using it to deal extra damage. But is that really suitable as a Power, or more in line with a Feat?
I agree, it is shifting away from magic items being super-important, but they're still important. I think the artificer may spend more time buffing others' magic equipment instead of just his own (he is a Leader in your example). I think he could be given fast ranged infusions; maybe he uses a wand implement like a wizard and warlock now. He could add Flaming to the fighter's sword one turn, and then add Concealment to the rogue's armor the next turn. Or maybe he could borrow some mechanics from Incarnum, and create "temporary" magic items out of mundane things that fit into one of the body slots, like a Close Burst infusion that turns all the party members' boots into boots of striding and springing for the duration of the encounter. He could have attacks that temporarily stop an opponent's magic items from functioning, or that temporarily turn one of their items into a cursed item. (Amulet of Health becomes Amulet of Strangulation ;) )
The various "equipment buff" powers are good ideas as far as I can tell. Not struck on the incarnum-esque idea, though.
But modifying opponents' gear is iffy all 'round. I had initially thought about something similar (negating an enemy's magic items, etc), but there might be several problems with that. Mostly, it's fairly specific in it's implementation. If the enemy has no magic items, it does nothing. This wouldn't be a problem in 3.5, since the Arty can cast a different infusion instead. But in 4e, you only get so many powers, and there's little opportunity to switch them out on the fly. We haven't seen a spontaneous caster yet, and I expect we never will.
IF WotC introduces a spontaneous-power 3e-Sorceror-esque class, then I think the Artificer should follow similar rules. But I'm hesitant to make up an entirely new mechanic on my own for that for now.
I guess I don't see it that way. If he's a Leader, his best powers will be things that help other people, not himself. A Leader doesn't need to hold his own in damage output; that's why he has the rest of the party. And let's not forget that all classes have the same BAB now, so the artificer will still be pretty useful in melee, like a cleric or warlord. Also, I think he can have big spells of his own; I think he'll have to. I don't think they're going to let him cherry pick big powers from any book whenever he wants. That wasn't an important part of his fluff in my opinion.
The thing is, though, WotC seems to be making a concious effort to allow every class the ability to contribute to combat through more than buffing other people. The cleric, from what I've seen for example, gets a bunch of attack powers that HAPPEN to provide benefits to his allies. No more does your "Leader" do nothing but buff his buddies while THEY do the cool stuff (ie: defeat enemies).
There's not a whole lot a bare-bones Artificer could do towards that. The majority of his infusions would be classified as "Utility Powers" or "Rituals" now. Before, if the Arty wanted to do anything other than hide behind someone else and hope THEY do well he needed wands and scrolls of other classes' spells. I suppose he's going to need plenty of his own powers now in order to do that.
The ability to grab any power from a list of a thousand powers whenever you need it is very powerful. It didn't seem powerful in 3e because there were many classes that could do it (Cleric and Druid especially). But in 4e, no one else can do that. All the powers have been designed around the idea that you pick about five that you know, and that's all you have. You can only change them when you level up, and then you lose your old ones.
The freedom to choose from a hundred powers on-demand (five hundred once a few splatbooks are released) will more than make up for being limited to lower level powers. At least it definitely looks that way to me. Look at multiclassing: you don't even get to pick new powers; you have to give up some of your original powers and trade them in. One of the human's "best qualities" is that he gets to learn one extra at-will power. Giving the artificer access to tons of powers seems like a very bad idea. And as I said, aside from just the power of it, it encourages the player scouring through every book he owns constantly during battle to find the one perfect spell. They're trying to move away from that and make it faster; they reccommend putting each of your abilities on cards and having them all in front of you so that you never need to look anything up. In the 4e sample I played, turns went much faster, and there are many more turns in a typical battle. Having a player who gets to pick from every book on his turn could result in massive slow down. Having three artificers in the group sounds almost unplayable.
I think there's a misunderstanding here. I'm not suggesting our Arty be able to use Spell Storing Item every round, "on demand" as it were. I don't even think he should be able to do it during combat, albeit in extreme circumstances. It was intended as a "prep" power, like it was in 3.5. You cast it when you have a full minute of peace, and THEN use the imbued item when appropriate. It shouldn't arise that the Artificer is bogging down play as he sifts through sourcebooks, since he can only do it once per rest.
Perhaps an ability similar to the Wizard's Spellbook is a better idea? The Artificer "knows" a number of powers, and can use those ones?
Well, like I said, there wasn't any precedence for fighters and rogues being able to use cool powers, or precedence for wizards to have to use implements, or precedence for warlocks having three different pacts. A lot has changed in the new edition, so I would expect a lot will change for the artificer as well. I also don't think the artificer should be allowed to pick a big spell from outside his role (like Slow, a Controller spell), unless he multiclasses. Letting the artificer use any spell from any role hurts the importance of the four roles. If the party is saying "The wizard only has damaging spells, we need more Control", then either the wizard should stop trying to be a Striker and take more Control spells, or the party should get another Controller. Or they should deal with being a damage-heavy, control-light party. If the artificer can make up for any role, than he becomes the most useful class in the game.
From what I've seen, a lot of what Rogues and Fighters, for example, get power-wise are simply translations of previous edition abilities into the new power system. Cleave, Sneak Attack, Tumble, etc. Granted there's a lot of new ones, but they're all easily acceptable given the fluff of previous classes. I have no problem accepting a charismatic Rogue being able to trick an enemy into stumbling to a new location. Really, it's just a variation on Improved Feint, a Rogue staple. If the Rogue somehow developed the ability to fling fireballs or shoot eye lazers I'd have a bit more difficulty. Similarly, the Artificer has always been the guy who uses someone else's spells. I'm growing to accept that that may not be the case anymore, however.
That would be better, in my opinion. Still, at that point it seems almost the same as just giving the artificer his own list of similar powers that are more balanced to fit in his role (Leader, for example). I also think an encounter power that says "You can use any of these five other encounter powers" is by definition more powerful than the other classes, who are limited to picking just one of those five other encounter powers alone. We haven't seen any powers yet that say "You can do this or this or this or this or this"; they're all specific and focused.
Firstly, just like to point out it wouldn't even be a DAILY power that says "you can use any of these encounter powers." Rather, it would be a class ability in a similar vein to the Wizard's spellbook. At the start of the day you choose one Encounter Ability of someone else, and may use it as a Daily. If it turns out you chose something tactically unsound (ie Fireball, but all you do is fight Azers) then tough. If you were to save it, however, for later in the day, you could use it reactively, albeit delayed. Buddy turned to stone? If you wait around long enough, perhaps you could whip out a Stone to Flesh. Though in retrospect StF would probably be a ritual. Regardless, I expect you understand the idea. Perhaps you identify somehow what challenges you're likely to face, and can prepare accordingly.
And the idea wasn't so that the Artificer could replace another role. It's just one Encounter power (done as a Daily). It's like having an extra magic item power. It was just so that the Artificer could provide a small remedy by "having just the thing" or what-have-you. All the classes appear to have this versatility to some degree, what with the various Leader-like qualities of the Paladin, the Striker-ish nature of some Fighter powers, etc. This was an attempt to provide something similar to the Artificer, though admittedly a little better, because versatility was kinda his thing.
Okay, so, suppose we scrap Spell Storing Item. How would the Artificer retain his gadgeteer qualities? Perhaps various "interrupt" powers that affect how he uses magic item powers? I've tried to include a few powers like that already, what with Weapon Surge and Power Surge. If he has a Circlet of Blasting, maybe he could expend Empower Item when using it to deal extra damage. But is that really suitable as a Power, or more in line with a Feat?
You can go to the Saturday morning cartoons and watch as Ash battles another trainer. Both trainers stand off the battlefield, yelling commands for their Pokémon to follow.
The big thing to see here is that the Trainers are using all their "Standard Actions" telling their Pokémon (replace with Artificer created robot, summoned creature, Psionic created creature, etc...) how to fight. It is presumed that if the Pokémon fought on their own, most of them don't have the imitative/wisdom/whatever to efficiently battle.
This is far different than the 18th level character who has a cohort who has an animal companion.
(Which gives the player three turns every round instead of one.)
The Familiar, the Druid, the Animal Companions and the Artificer were moved to the second set of 4E releases to give time to resolve this problem and other problems.
Hopefully we will not see cohorts anymore.
If a game needs extra players, just let a person play two characters.
I think this could solve things in that respect.
An Artificer could have alchemic grenades, a robot creation, and become a Creation Controller.
It would be interesting if the Artificer could choose a field of study just like the Warlock had a pact to make:
Choose one of the below:
Alchemy (controller)
Robotics (defender)
Magical Buffs (leader)
Iron Man (Striker)
"Pokémon Effect" etc
An interesting suggestion regarding 4e's focus on "action economy" as I believe it was worded. The designers do appear to want every player to take about the same amount of time playing their turn, as opposed to previous editions where the Druid's player effectively gets 2 turns (one for his bear), and if you've got summoned creatures in there too? Fuhgedaboudit. I'm not quite certain how well that plays into the Artificer, though, since the closest he has to minions/summonables would be crafted homunculi, and they're usually only specifically TO provide those extra actions (ie: pick-pocketing with the Filcher, another ranged attack with the Arbalest, etc).
An Artificer could have alchemic grenades, a robot creation, and become a Creation Controller.
Oh boy, alchemical grenades. THERE'S a can of wyrms I'd rather not open. ;)
"It would be interesting if the Artificer could choose a field of study just like the Warlock had a pact to make:
Choose one of the below:
Alchemy (controller)
Robotics (defender)
Magical Buffs (leader)
Iron Man (Striker)
The problem there, though, is that you start making effectively different classes. While those would be good potential ideas for Paragon Paths or the like, for now I plan to stick to just the one role with some "dabbling."
A division along the lines of a field of study isn't a bad idea if it were reined in a little, though. Perhaps the "artificer tactic" could be dependant on whether our Arty prefers ranged Implement powers or "magic item" powers. Cha for the former, Con for the latter?
-Joni
...In addition, each character can only activate a few different magic item powers in a given day, so the guy who brings a loaded pack full of flashy items doesn’t get as much bang for his buck...
Interesting!
...Most of the time, you can determine the properties and powers of a magic item during a short rest. In the course of handling the item for a few minutes, you discover what the item is and what it does. You can identify one magic item per short rest.
Some magic items might be a bit harder to identify, such as cursed or nonstandard items, or powerful magical artifacts. Your DM might ask for an Arcana check to determine their properties, or you might even need to go on a special quest to find a ritual to identify or to unlock the powers of a unique item...
Also interesting!
You can also use the Enchant Magic Item ritual to create an item of your level or lower...
...As you adventure, you’ll come across magic items as part of the treasure you acquire. Often, these are magic items much higher than your level—items you can’t enchant and can’t easily afford to buy...
...This isn’t a favorable transaction for you—the sale price of a magic item, or the value of residuum you get from disenchanting it, is only one-fifth the normal price of the item...
Hmm...
And a class ability to make "eating" a magic item a more appealing option MAY sound good on the outside, I suspect we'd need to see the economics in play first. It might muck with things a little too much. The 3.5 Artificer with his extra Crafting XP was almost bad enough, after all.
-Joni
Maybe 4E Artificers are better at retaining Residuum than other classes?
As long as that doesn't break anything, I support it. However, I think we'll need to see the actual rules about that sort of thing before we can say anything for sure.
In addition, each character can only activate a few different magic item powers in a given day, so the guy who brings a loaded pack full of flashy items doesn’t get as much bang for his buck.
The above was taken from the Magic Items Excerpt.
What does this mean for the 4E Artificer? Does that mean that he will no longer be the uber large backpack full of random magic items for any occasion man? Or does this point out that [speculation] his class abilities might enhance this mystery number of magical item uses per day? [/speculation]
It just seems that the excerpt is essentialy against the entire core concept of the artificer... or at the very least, the artificer that we all know and love today.
Regarding the limited uses of magic items, we'll have to see what the rules are for that. I expect, though, that the Artificer will have assorted abilities to get around those restrictions. What kind of Artificer would he be otherwise?
DON'T JUDGE ME!
Artificers should be Arcane Leaders, more than anything. I've played in many games with Artificers and the only thing they could do well that other classes couldn't was add a new layer of stackable bonuses. Their weapon and armor infusions really kicked butt. Using Wands doesn't make them a Controller. If that were true then Rogues are also Controllers. Not until the Knight did any class really live up to Defender, all others were just meatshields - not the same thing.
Artificers need something to set themselves stylistically apart:
1) Boosting Magic Items - As a leader they should have "quick boosts" similar to the Cleric but with items. Choose a group (Weapon, Armor, Implement) and give a powerbonus to either themselves or an ally.
2) Arcane Healing - Similar to Lay on Hands but it uses an Item's Power in addition to their own. This would allow them to heal Warforged and regular characters, albeit not as well as a cleric.
3) Item Creation - this is problematic. In 3e only Artificers could "steal" exp from items but now everyone seems able. They should get some sort of bonus, but I really don't know enough to make a reliable suggestion.
4) Arcane Powers - Artificers should be different from Wizards and Warlocks in some ways but similar in others. Half of their powers should use Implements (spells) the other half weapons (to keep the feel of Item Mastery). A Wizard or Warlock will only use an Implement. An Artificer should use a Wand Implement to blast a foe with a Magic Missile, then an Arcane Charged weapon to demolish another for.
As far as feats they should be closer to a cleric:
1) Ritual Creation
2) Some Armor and Weapons
As far as skills they should be closer to a Wizard
1) Arcane - this is a no brainer.
2) "Knowledges" - lots of studying.
3) Use Magic Device - if this is still a skill they should be the ones to get it.
Artificers should be Arcane Leaders, more than anything. I've played in many games with Artificers and the only thing they could do well that other classes couldn't was add a new layer of stackable bonuses. Their weapon and armor infusions really kicked butt. Using Wands doesn't make them a Controller. If that were true then Rogues are also Controllers. Not until the Knight did any class really live up to Defender, all others were just meatshields - not the same thing.
That's a much better way of putting it than what I came up with.
And hopefully so you don't think this entire thread to be some selfish exercise, I'd just like to say that I intend the "pre-release" Artificer that we're building here to be a community project. If you've got ideas for Powers, post 'em up and I'll put 'em in. If you disagree on specifics let me know and we can debate. If there's an overwhelming community opinion that Artificers belong in the Controller Role then I'll disagree, but I'll make the change in the earlier post to reflect the community opinion. Likewise the Power Source.
Just so's we're all clear.
For me, the artificer's essential angle is making things. I really like the idea of a pet construct, or the artificer deploying its powers through the clockwork items it makes. They might be efficient users of residuum, with a wide variety of ways to enhance their constructions with this substance.
As for power source and role, Arcane Leader sounds best for now. Definitely arcane.
What makes the artificer cool? That's what the designers of 4Eberron will have asked themselves. Is it giving boosts to items? That's handy, but I doubt they'll make an artificer which just hands out buffs, then sits back during combat to watch the fireworks.
For me, the artificer's essential angle is making things. I really like the idea of a pet construct, or the artificer deploying its powers through the clockwork items it makes. They might be efficient users of residuum, with a wide variety of ways to enhance their constructions with this substance.
As for power source and role, Arcane Leader sounds best for now. Definitely arcane.
I agree the "buff and sit back" idea, while relatively true to the 3.5 Artificer, does sound a tad dull to play. The Cleric, who could also fill a similar role in 3.5, has been modified in 4e to continue actively contributing to combat even while doling out the buffs.
Rather than step on the clerics toes in this regard, I suggest the Artificer's buffs be predominantly minor actions, allowing him to do something in addition to buffing during his turn. Or, if he really wants, buffing a lot in a shorter span of time, since he can sub a standard or move action for a minor. Then he'd be able to spend the rest of the combat actively contributing via attacks etc.
And while I agree the pet construct idea is a cool one, I'm hesitant to make rules for it. WotC has already nixed that aspect of the Wizard, Ranger, AND Paladin (no Familiars, Animal Companions, or Paladin Mounts), and I expect that's because they're having difficulty hammering out good mechanics. I would prefer ol' Arty to use the same mechanics as everybody else, so perhaps, for now, we can save the Golemancer idea for a Paragon Path?
Oh, and ix-nay on the ockwork-clay. ;) But I agree that the Artificer should get more bang for his buck when it comes to magic items and their powers.
Would it be worth coming up with a new keyword, Infusion? Something specified in the Artificer class description?
Infusions: Many of the Artificer's powers are labeled Infusions. Infusions target one or more items, and bestow their effects upon the creature(s) that attend the items. If the attending creature ceases to attend the item before the duration of the Infusion expires, the creature ceases to be affected by the Infusion until it attends the item again. If the Infusion is an attack, the attack automatically succeeds if the item is unattended. Otherwise, the attack must overcome the specified defense of the creature attending the item.
Creatures of the Construct or Living Construct subtype are also valid targets for Infusions. You may target a Construct or Living Construct with an Infusion whenever you may target an item with that Infusion. Constructs and Living Constructs so targeted are affected as if they attended items targeted by the Infusion. If the Infusion is an attack, it must overcome the specified defense of the Construct or Living Construct as if it attended an item being targeted by the Infusion.
This is mainly to clarify rules regarding infusions in a single location, and eliminate the need to repeat "You can target a construct, etc" every time. 3.5 did this (even when it wasn't appropriate, ie: I need to target an item to cast Blade Barrier?), and I think it would work even better here, too, since we can pick-and-choose which powers are considered "Infusions" and which are just Spells.
Also, we could make it a rule that the Artificer can only cast one Infusion per round, despite them predominantly being Minor actions. This would prevent him from choosing (or being convinced by his party) to spend every turn spitting out 3 buffs instead of doing something interesting. Although, that might need some work. If his attack powers are Infusions too, there's a problem.