New 5E Race/Class/Stat Options.
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/unearthed-arcana-eberron
Hmm, this makes me want to write up an Eberron encounter and post it here with some pre-gens attached. I was always a big fan of Eberron and ran some good games with it.
Woo, Warforged and Changling!
Warforged is solid for any kind of tanky weapon user. Though mostly for the immunity to stinking cloud and waterbreathing.
Changling is all sorts of RP fun. How strong it is depends on your imagination.
Shifter is a bit strong. THP per short rest, in addition to +1 AC or advantage on Wis saves is more then enough to make up for the missing +1.
Dragon Marks probably a little weak overall, but it's useable. Though it can be nice to pick up revivify.
Artificer is a bit disappointing. Pretty good for a sub-class, but it doesn't really capture the whole artificer thing.
Edit: added colors.
A few things I think need clarifying -
1) Do shifters get their proficiency bonus for any natural weapons? I would assume so, but it should be explicitly mentioned.
2) It doesn't indicate there is a limit to the number of scrolls you can imbue (just the number of spell levels Arcane Recovery offers you) but Superior Artificer implies that there is by increasing that number by one.
3) Since you need a feat for a Dragon Mark, does that mean that only humans can start with them? Do they manifest later in life, or do other races just not see any benefit from them until they can get the feat at 4th level?
The races are pretty much as I expected, although I'm a bit disappointed that none of the races get a +2 stat, although that may just be because of their "playtest" status. The Warforged hasn't changed from its Next incarnation, which is also a little disappointing as they could have used this opportunity to test other racial options.
Artificer class is interesting as a Wizard tradition. It makes sense, although I would have liked to have seen something that more radically changed the way a Wizard plays. From what's presented, it would appear that the 3.5 and 4th edition artificer is a multiclass character in 5th.
What I read into this is that we shouldn't expect an Eberron campaign guide any time soon, and so here are some basic versions of the unique player options to tide fans over in the mean time.
I don't understand the benefit of the class features infusing potions and scrolls.
You're using the spell slot. The only benefit is that you can hand it to someone else that can use a potion or a scroll.
Granted, that's nice, and much more cheaply than actually creating a spell scroll, but it just isn't enough in my opinion.
Ugh, browser ate my post.... but I'm still excited to see this!
eberg wrote:
Swamp_slug wrote:
The artificer was originally an AD&D wizard subclass 8 years before Eberron came out. It was inPlayers Options: Spells and Magic.
knightserpent wrote:
Seems a bit overwhelming. I do sort of like the idea of a Wizard with a bit of healing, though.
A couple of the Shifter races look neat, Mainly Wildhunt and Beasthide. I like the Warforged because I always like the Warforged and that's clearly Warforged.
I'm unsure if any of the features are worth not having a +2 to one stat. Maybe the devs decided the +2s are too good on the existing races?
Disappointed in Artificer personally. I have played one in 3.5 and 4e and liked the fact they were like a wizard, like a cleric but not.
The lack of new spells for the setting makes it seem like artificer is just some place holder for what it once was.
We need some Eberron specific spells or tradition specific spells for them to really differentiate it for 'just another tradition'
Examples
Cantrip: Static Shock (like Shocking grasp but would cause disadvantage on attacks)
level 1 : Indisputable Possession, Make whole
level 2 : Lucky Blade
level 3 : Blast Rod, Suppress requirement
so on and so fourth.
Lack of a actual healing spell is also strange. the potions kinda make up for that but not as useful as some of the spells in 4th
Lack of construct specific spells is also disturbing but makes sense with how warfordged are handled now.
The item creation part I like for the most part. Sorta broken with scrolls but not bad first attempt
What Im not keen on the fact its a wizard tradition. Would have liked a new class that could bring out the other traits of the dungeon delving side of them.
I know disable device and lock picking are just dex checks now and that’s nice and all but at least give the artificer something to enhance skills in those situations.
Also not being able to normally use a sword or crossbow is just ridiculous. A crossbow and sword are part of what make it different from 'just another mage' heck they can even use them as casting implements and imbue them with personal buffs.
The races look good tho I want to ask whats up with warfordged?
Is it because the rules are supposed to be simpler or the spells haven’t been made but it reads like they can be healed normally?
Can i now feed a healing potion to one and it works with full effect? cast a heal and it goes at full effect? because that’s just odd
Part of what makes their construct body different is they heal differently too.
Otherwise not a bad start to trying to get things done.
IxidorRS wrote:
knightserpent wrote:
And after confiring with others and the old rules/history of dragonmarks it seem a bit off.
First: The dragonmarks progression.
At first glance sure thats cool BUT the level of mark also denotes the position you can rise to in the houses typically.
You wont find a heir of lets say Deneith with a lesser mark taking the role over one with a greater.
There needs to be a addition: Dragonmark evolves at DM's discression
If everybody’s mark evolved to greater automatically then that kinda defeats the purpose. Its not there for the 'oh shiny I can cast something' it MEANS something special.
Second: That mark does infact make the character special and grants a slight amount of respect automatically.
Marked people are special and even tho you people state they don’t grant special status in a house.. that’s just WRONG
It does grant a certain amount of respect, sure you wont get to have any major game breaking benefits. Even in 3.5 you had to have a mark to take the feat 'favored in house'
But a request form a marked person vs an unmarked usually holds a bit more sway, let alone what level of mark.
The houses are known for discrimination to keep things pure and running smoothly. Tho that also raises the point of the Dragon's Teeth, a fine example.
I simply wouldn’t believe if Joe blow mage wright came to ask for a research grant that he would be given the exact same consideration as some one with a least mark or higher.
The houses just don’t work that way.
Third: Dragonmarked feats
I know feats aren’t a major part of 5th but there should be some 'customization' specifically for players that the DM allows to have a mark.
Favored in house, extra casting, and so on. Not all marks are created equal and not all marked are immediately loved(tho some base respect is there), that’s the point.
Done ranting in this post.
The artificier is a concept too cool to be limited to be only a wizard's tradition. I would create a complete class with exclusive gameplay, for example some ideas from "magic of incarnum", spendind points of essence (a encounter power for metamagic effects. There is a great potential to be wasted. My suggestion about marketing is if a class has been in the past, it has to be a complete class again, even the jester from dragon magazine.
What if for my campaing I want a artificier goblin with an army of splaterpunk cyborgs?
My idea for a future artificier is to mixture the original from Eberron, the alchemist class from pathfinder, the prestige class "ironsoul forgemaster" from "Magic Incarnum" and the alchemy from White Wolf's "Mummy: resurecttion" and "Promethean: the created". The artificier wouldn´t use a spellbook, but points of essence for infusitions, bombs, arcane-clonkpunk technology..
* Why to be a artificier PC when I could hire a nPC artificier to craft magic item?
Rainami wrote:
Yes!
Whelp... these rules are going to need a lot of work before they are actually usable. The core ideas behind the rules are cool. They are, however, as per the statement at their introduction, VERY rough.
I am very impressed by this article, and am looking forward to this monthly column (kender next month, pretty please!).
I very much like that the rules are called out as draft, and that the table should playtest/tweak them to suit.
I'm not an eberron fan exactly, but I will be using warforged, artificers and dragonmarks for my dragon age(ish) campaign. Very sweet!
When it comes to the DragonMarks i would have made having one a bond, and when you have that bond you can take to feat to actualy gain power from it.
Tempest_Stormwind wrote:
I love it. I would have liked this to have been a bit more polished (I know Keith Baker has been tinkering around with rules for these things for a while now), but I do like it as it is. That said, some of it does appear a bit underwhelming.
Comparing the Hill Dwarf with the High Elf we get two races that are fairly comparable. Some features are a bit more useful than others, but overall they're close enough to each other. Here's why I think they're comparable:
+2 Constitution = +2 Dexterity
+1 Wisdom = +1 Intelligence
Medium = Medium
Darkvision = Darkvision
Dwarven Resilience = Fey Ancestry + Trance
Dwarven Combat Training = Elf Weapon Training
Stonecunning = Keen Senses
Tool Proficiency = Extra Language
Dwarven Toughness = Cantrip
Dwarven and Common = Elven and Common
I will have to look trough the tweets but i remember Mike mearls tweeting at one point that we would get the warforged first then the kender.
But instead of just the warforged we also got some more eberion stuff.
Personaly I hope this means the kender will come with more dragonlance stuff.
Thoughts
warforged - armor being a single +1 is underwhelming and doesn't feel like a proper warforged. How bout sub races that reflect the different feats from 3e. Unarmored, light, medium and heavy. Give the heavy a movement penalty to offset the bonus of having wicked armor to start.
changling - I'm confused by the inclusion of the term "polymorph" I feel like this implies that the changling gets the physical traits of the creature it changes into. I would have assumed the shape change ability would function more like the warlock invocation that gives you "at will" disguise.
artifcer - the lack of melee options, light armor and trap sense takes away from the MacGuyver feel of the class.
Ignominia wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
On first glance the shifter seems fairly weak, but upon considering it further it does seem somewhat balanced. Warforged are a toss up and is entirely campaign dependent as to how balanced they are.
Dragonmarks I surprisingly like. I initially didn't like that they were feat based, but given it's a single feat that autoscales that actually seems quite nice. As for what that means on a campaign level, Eberron was never intended to require NPCs be built as PCs. They had a plethora of NPC-only classes to try to get around how NPCs worked in 3.5e.
Tempest Stormwind wrote:
knightserpent wrote:
One thing I REALLY like about this article: it has us discussing how we would modify the rules provided for our own games. In any case, I will post something about how I would modify the provided stats tomorrow. Good stuff everyone! This has been a fun thread to read.
Really disappointed by this Article, especially the Artificer class. While the 'Theme' is there, the rules themselves don't do any justice to the Concept itself. It really doesn't strike me as the Magical Tinkerer of previous editions.
I am happy to see Dragonmarks restricted again as Keith Baker originally presented them, I loathed that anybody could take any mark in the last edition, as it very much went against the Setting. I think the progression of the marks from Least to Greater is a bit off, but I very much approve of it being a single Feat choice overall.
Not impressed by the Shifter, Changeling or Warforged examples, but that's par for the course with 5e Racial Design.
In the end, I would much prefer to see Keith Baker himself design any Eberron material for 5e, so it best meets the Settings particulars while being adapted to 5e. If that meant making changes to the already present Races/Classes, so much the better IMO.
I'm simply enjoying the fact that we're getting new stuff for our D&D games. Personally, though, if this new material is as flawed as you all claim, then perhaps it is being released as a public playtest. Not an educated guess, but still a guess.
By the way: Wildhunt shifters also gain advantage on Wis checks; doesn't that make it balanced?
I'm glad that they're releasing this stuff online so that we don't have to wait for setting books. However, I really dislike the Artificer as a wizard subclass. It should be its own class.
1st: No mention of a feedback mechanism!? I'd assume that the survey monkey poll they're doing will be it, but when? How long will we have to test these?
2nd: Great flavor, but with a few obvious omissions. Shifter is nice, but how does that race interact with say the Druid class? And so forth.
3rd: LOVE that they're opening this up to everyone!
Dougan_Axehammer wrote:
Ignominia wrote:
Looking at the shifter a bit more closely, I see that the razor claw doesn't add any weapon damage to the roll, so it's not quite the same as the two-weapon fighting style. Expecting a Dex 16, it's effectively a 1d6 (or 1d8 if you want to be slightly more generous) weapon that deals only 1 point of extra damage on a critical hit. It brings it down in power level from what I initially thought. Dunno about the final balance though.
Okay after looking through the material, I have to say I wont be using it but will look for updates on it. To call it rough is a understatement, but it is a starting point. Im hoping that psionics get a playtest like this.
As races go they all seem a little weak. The changling seems like he might be fun, but needs either a plus to dex or cha. The shifters subclasses seem weak and they should start with a +2 to dex to begin with. Looking at the razorclaw as one of the weakest subclasses if not the weakest, and they are boring. Maybe the goat one can climb as a bonus action with advantage. Im disappointed at the warforged because after having a couple of forum chats with baker, I thought we might get the different types of warforged that came prepackaged with armor(not just a little buff), plus again with the low stats. Im mean cmon man the guys where maid to be better soldiers wherent they?
Im with alot of people on these boards that the artificer might be better off as his own class. I think a int bard build would be better that wizard at this point.
Like I said in the beginning, this stuff is a little too rough to use at this point, but it is a start.
Don't see any major issues with the races, though I preer Keith Baker's Warforged over the current one. The action point system is....eh. Not really bad, but I don't see that much a reason to use it either.
Thoroughly underwhelmed by the Artificer though. Making it just a subclass of the Wizard already gave me that sinking feeling in my gut, the kind of feeling where you could just tell this already looks bad. The potion and scroll creation is neat, but limited by your Arcane Recovery and spellslots. Not really sure how they work alongside concentration rules and stuff, but eh. Infusing weapons are armor to get a +1 bonus to attack/damage and defense is..alright I guess, but doesn't seem all that great for a level 10 feature. Level 14 feature is where I'm not sure I like the class much. Being able to create a single magic item over a week, and then not being able to make anything else for the month just seems.....I know WotC is incredibly paranoid about magic item treadmill that they're supposed to be super rare(unless you use the given loot tables), but that just seems overly restrictive, especially when you're already limited in which items you can make.
As with the Warforged, I'll probably stick with the alternate Artificer.
Hmmn action points are basically force points form Star Wars Saga.
I like the artificer well enough, though you could as well call it a craft mage and actually work out a new class. The original artificer never appealed to me though.
Races need a little polish and spice, though the balance isn't far off.
* About action points one of my ideas was a free extra action point as racial traits, but only for certain checks (Str or a skill, for examples).
* The artificier needs the return of spells "repairer" to "heal constructs". If there is a module about "monster pets" we can bet somebody will want a "mecha pilot" PC (yes, a giant robot like the anime "the vision of Escaflowne") or a clockpunk version of Iron Man's armour.
Also I suggest the recover the class feature to spend spell slots to recharge magic item.
* Mechanatrix is a planetouched race from "Fiend Folio". I would bet it may be a interesting race for artificiers, better if there is a module about cyberpunk implants. In my setting there is a steampunk goblin civilitation like the ones from Warcraft universe.
* Why to use an artificier? Maybe because the constructs are inmune to diseases and it may be a good army againts the hordes of undeads controlled by a necromancer warlord, or to hunt aberrations from the Far-Realm. The artificier would be something like a pokemon trainer with constructs pets.
Shifters seem ok. I'm liking more variety...4e only gave longtooth and razerclaw.
Warforged seem ok too. IMO, +1 STR, +1 CON, and +1 AC is balanced out with the other PHB races. Plus immunity to disease...No need for food, drink or sleep...They just need racial feats to alter their bodies. Built in weapons, armor, items, etc. are fun.
Someone posted a slightly better changeling here, IMO.
Dragonmarks seem a little weak for a whole feat. Especially a feat that doesn't fully kick in until 9th level. I dunno. If you want a few spells, there's already a feat for that and it gives you a few (daily) spells right away. Plus you can pick them, and pick the ability to use for them.
The Artificer is where I'm thinking they are all wrong. It should not be a wizard subclass. It should be about implements, tools, X-bows, traps, gagetry, etc. It should draw from wiz, cleric, and ranger spell lists. Plus have spells/abilities of its own. We'd be better off making our own Artificer from scratch in these forums. For example, a spell like 'mending' should be a free cantrip from level one.
I never played or DMed Eberron, but I've loved using warforged and the artificer class. They're perfect for my home-brew steampunky setting.
* What if I want a psionic artificier (it was canon in "Magic of Eberron" for a shardmind PC, or a psiforged?
And artificier isn´t only a list of spells, she is a trap searcher and disarmer, like a hybrid rogue-spellcaster.
* Could an artificier to create an arcane-punk electric motor? That could change the warfare and the industry.
* How would be an artificier in Ravenloft?
I don't know, an artificer could simply be a multi-class, it allows for alot of variety and comes close to the original class in my opinion. The wizard in this edition is mainly an utility caster and fits well with the artificer. Most of my players hated the artificer in play, so I dont mind a different take on it. Frankly I think the original artificer was more complicated than multi-classing in 5th edition so I do not really see an issue.
in 4th edition a artificer could work as the parties main healer.
But i'm nor sure this artificer culd take that roll as he can only use upto level 3 slots to invest in healing so scales bad at higer levels.
edwin_su wrote:
edwin_su wrote:
Unfortunately they won't have core mechanics around building permanent magic items. I expect the best we could see would be enhancement on items that function for X period of time (to avoid using concentration I'd expect a short rest mechanic).
Looks like the artificer can make +2 magic shields. That seems pretty wild to me. Along with spell scrolls allowing for more concentration buffs and using your arcane recovery proactiovely it seems to me that the artificer will be quite powerful.
I do like the artificer they give, but it doesn't fit with what I know of the Eberron artificer (which is admittedly through DDO). I think it should be its own class, modelled after cleric or bard, with a couple sub-classes. One could be like the beastmaster ranger, though instead of calling animal companions they have a personal construct buddy they upgrade and repair (preferably not limited to just the dog-like constructs in DDO). Another sub-class could focus on using any magic item, even with spells not on their class list, and another could focus on temporary combat buffs that don't require concentration (or where it affects several characters for one casting that requires concentration). Give proficiency in thieve's tools and tinker's tools, and/or make a repair kit that fuctions like a healer's kit but for constructs (and possibly other equipment).
The one in the pdf has no feel of being good with mechanical devices, or even many magical ones. Being able to make temporary potions and scrolls expands what spells they can have available during the day without taking a long rest to prepare new ones, allows concentration effects without risk of them ending early, and can allow other characters to use the potions or scrolls if need be, but I don't think you should have to be a rock gnome artificer in order to get a sense of being master of the mechanical stuff.
I'm thinking the artificer needs its own class and to harken back to its roots a little more. Like having Artificer Knowledge, where he can examine an object and know if it's magical at first level.
Hit Dice: 1d8 per artificer level
Hit Points at 1st Level: 8 + your Constitution modifier
Hit Points at Higher Levels: 1d8 (or 5) + your Constitution modifier per artificer level after 1st
Proficiencies
Armor: Light armor
Weapons: Simple weapons, hand crossbows, longswords, rapiers, shortswords
Tools: None (If you want thieves tools, take a background)
Saving Throws: Constitution, Intelligence (because)
Skills: Choose any three
Standard spell progression, Int based.
1st: Artificer Knowledge
2nd: Infustions of Potions and Scrolls (not going to be used with Arcane Recovery, needs a new way to limit them though)
3rd: Craft Homunculus (Maybe like the Rangers pet at 3rd)
4th: Ability Score Improvement
5th: -
6th: Infuse Weapons & Armor
7th: -
8th: Ability Score Improvement
9th: -
10th: Superior Artificer
11th: Magical Secrets (Like Bard, but a level later)
12th: Ability Score Improvement
13th: -
14th: Master Artificer
15th: Magical Secrets
16th: Ability Score Improvement
17th: -
18th: Magical Secrets
19th: Ability Score Improvement
20th: I don't know...
That's what I'd like to see. And it'd give it back the feel of an Artificer. I don't believe that to be over powered in any particular way. I would really like some way to re-use Retain Essense. Perhaps as the capstone ability where you can basically change a magic item to something else. A +2 Longsword becomes a +1 Flaming Longsword, etc. But you can do it on a short rest or something. Maybe even take an action if you're attuned to it.
Anyway, feel free to pick at it and help me make adjustments.
the race are interesting, but seem kind of weak on a optimazation point of view (yes I know a lot of player don'T care since they only want to RP, but why would it be bad to have all race equally powerfull so if it doesn't hurt there RP aspect?
In these spoiler box I'm giving my opinion on the races. and offer ideas to solve the problem. I did not do any playtest so it is simply a observation made from first impression and my ideas might be unbalance and might require some adjusting.
Warforged
So the warforged is technically a good class for strenght/melee oriented caracter. like a barbarian, fighter, paladin for exemple.
SO let's compare him to an other strong strenght melee race : Half orc
-Both are medium and have a 30ft speed.
-Warforged gain +1strenght/+1 Constitution compare to the half orc +2 strenght/+1 Constitution
-Warforged gain +1 AC (that from raw stack with additional armor? unarmed defense? mage armor? bracer of defense?), in past edition warforged couldn'T gain new armor since there plating was considered armored, but seem like it's no longer the case, since it's the wood/metal plating that offer the +1AC, does it apply on the druid wildshape as well? does my druid bear form will have wood/metal plating as well? can you even become a druid since you are made from metal and druid simply don't wear metal?), the half orc gain relentless endurance: (if he drop to 0 HP he drop to 1 instead 1/long rest)
-Warforged gain immunity to desease, Half orc got +1dX on crit damage using melee weapon
-Warforged gain no eat/breath for free, but this is mainly RP related, optimization wise, is very situational that eating/breathing is a problem. The Half orc gain Intimidation skill
-Warforged got a improved trance like ability making you a very good sentinel for night watch, but in 5e night watch isn,t hard, since your character do NOT need to sleep 8 hours, he need to NOT do STRENEOUS activities for 8 hours to gain a long rest, so it's very easy to say that each character will do a 2 hours night watch and sleep 6 hours and everyone will benefit from a long rest even the spellcaster) and if they are disturbed, if the problem is solve rapidly there is no penalty to the long rest.
I would like to see maybe a little bonus on teh warforged, maybe a subrace to add on him something like:
-Mage Guardian: you had been created to protect a powerfull Mage who imbue on your plating magical runes (cannot be dispel) giving you an extra +1 Constitution and you can redirect a single target spell targeted toward an ally within 10 feet of you to target you instead once per short rest.
-Front line breachers: you have been created to break the ennemy defense. You have +1 strenght and once per short rest when you hit with an attack you can choose to also shove the opponent in order to create a breach in the ennemy line defense.
-Front line defender: You have been created to protect the front line. You have +1 Constitution and you gain the sentinel feat
knightserpent wrote:
knightserpent wrote:
For action points I'd like to see it set up so that by using an action point you can unlock advanced uses of your feats. So for example say you have the skilled feat, whenever you use an action point to boost a roll with one of those skills you get advantage or double prof, or the bonus die from the action point is bigger or maxed out, or you re-roll 1's on both the d20 and the action point dice. If you have the tough feat you can spend an action point to take reduce damage form a hit, or nix a crit down to a normal hit or something.
For artificer yes it needs to be a lot better, and here's my pitch for sub-classes: Item types. One of the issues with the 3e artificer was his sheer mind numbing versatility, instead of every ficer makes every item each ficer has to choose what he wants to craft. Now this could be done piecemeal or in progressions or as a one time only choice. The next bit is that the ficer would make items specific to the ficer he doens't craft that sloppy inconsistent garbage from the DMG the ficer knows what he is doing and how it works. Trying to pull character features out of the mess that is the DMG magic item list is just askign for a headache.
I'd really like to see the artificer as it's own class instead of a watered down wizard spin-off. I'm not too hopeful if they plan to take things that used to be full, flavorful classes, cut out all the good stuff and then stick some of the tiny leftover pieces into existing classes. The subclass system, as designed, is just too limited to really support this paradigm.
My idea would be to have the ariticer's main features be "Apparati" and "Infustions".
Arcane Apparati: An arcane apperatus would be a unique class-feature-based magic item such as a piece of armor, a weapon, a turret, a homonculus, etc, that would be somewhat customizable. As part of the artificer's class, he could choose a number of these and potentionally break-down and rebuild them into different types when leveling up. They're abilities would be fueld by expenditure of the artificer's Infusions.
For example, lets say that at 1st level the artificer gets 2 Arcane Appareti. He chooses Artificial Aegis (armor) and Homonculus. He then chooses a special ability to go in his armor and stats for his mechanical familiar. When he gets to level 3, he gets to spend Infusions to boost the specific abilities of his Artificial Aegis or Homonculus instead of casting them normally. Alternatively, could have chosen Aritificial Arms (a weapon) to get a special crossbow and Artificial Wonder (a turret, for example) to be an compelling ranged character.
Infusions: Infusions function like the 3.5 version, essentially being special spells that must be imbued into objects or people. The artificer uses his infusions to temporarily turn an ally's sword into a Flaming sword. He can turn the theif's armor into Healing armor for one fight. And so on. He can also expend infusion levels to empower his Arcane Apparati.
Permanent magic item generation could be a completely different system and would still remain optional while the artificier gets to retain the flavor of mastering, well... artifice.
Cyber-Dave wrote:
Is this actually a playtest and should we expect to see it updated/revised? I have a feeling they are just putting it out there and leaving it as is until/unless an Eberron setting book is produced.
I started an Eberron campaign at the very beginning of the D&D Next playtest and it's still going strong. I made the arduous decision back then to allow one of my players to be an artificer. Which meant I had to reinvent the class from a 5E point of view, leaning heavily on the original 3.5 version but trying my best to simplify it. I've come up with or adapted infusions to keep it . It's been a lot of work but a lot of fun, too.
That said, these new rules feel a bit underwhelming. I just don't like the idea of warforged wearing armor; they ARE armor. I'd miss that flavor. It would be neat if warforged could choose from two or three different sort of backgrounds that help define the type of composite plating they have, rather than using a feat for better armor as in 3.5.
This changeling seems okay, and the shifter is fine.
The artificer just shouldn't be a subclass of wizard to me. I'll stick with what I have as I keep an eye on future developments, and I cross my fingers that Eberron will come back into its own.
ppaladin123 wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
IxidorRS wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
SleepsInTraffic wrote:
...I also zeroed in on the subrace idea on my take.
My Standard 'Forged is:
+1 Con
Speed 30
Type Construct - but can be affected by things that don't affect constructs, or things that only affect humanoids. Has advantage on saves against those effects. (Note that construct type on its own has no specific immunities, but there are spells like Charm Person and Hold Person, or indeed even Cure Wounds, that won't work on constructs that might work on warforged.)
(Corner-case ruling: You can be raised from the dead, but cannot be animated as an undead nor resurrected.)
Resistance to healing spells unless they work on constructs.
Immune to Disease
Advantage on Death saves. Cannot be revived with Medicine nor a healing kit.
Enters inactive state instead of sleeping. Requires some sort of artisan's tools on hand to recover HP when spending Hit Dice.
Languages: Common.
Composite Plating: You have a suit of bonded armor built into your body. If your class or background would supply you with armor, you may select a weapon with which you are proficient in its place instead. You are proficient with light armor. (If your plating is heavier, you're not proficient in it unless your class is - that is, a stock juggernaut wizard is at a disadvantage, but a juggernaut fighter works, and could later progress into wizard. This is to prevent overlap with the hill dwarf and create a larger number of warforged as martial classes, since the scout isn't an ideal choice for a caster.). You can't remove your plating or wear other armor with it (although it can be enhanced as if it were a regular suit of armor, potentially even being made magical). The armor responds as if it were metal armor. (Corner-case ruling: It does get damaged by rust monsters, but it cannot be destroyed, and recovers 1 lost AC point for every Hit Die you expend to recover HP during a rest.)
Subraces:
-Scout: +1 Dex, Fleet of Foot (+5 speed). Composite plating is light armor, AC 12+Dex.
-Soldier: +1 Str, +1 Con (total +2). Composite plating is medium armor, AC 14+Dex (max 2), disadvantage on Stealth.
-Juggernaut: +2 Str. Composite plating is heavy armor, AC 16 (no Dex). Disadvantage on Stealth, and your speed is 20.
(Note: All of these are medium. They're slender and slight (scout) or bulky like a musclebound orc (juggernaut), but not big enough to introduce PC size changes.)
And as for the Adamantine Body and Mithral Body feats? We've already got them!
"Adamantine Body" is Heavy Armor Mastery. (Think about it: Requires heavy armor and reduces all damage you take while wearing heavy armor? That's what the feat was supposed to do. Fluff can describe them as grafting on or transforming their armor into heavier plates, increasing their bulk and weight.)
"Mithral Body" is Medium Armor Mastery. (Think about it: +3 max dex and no disadvantage on Stealth while getting Medium armor grade protection? Fluff can describe the plating being upgraded or the warforged transforming to use lightweight, ultrahard, quieter metals than their normal wood and stone plating.)
There's no equivalent "body" feat for scouts, but it would be a hypothetical "light armor mastery". (I'm leaning on +1 Dex, and wearing light armor can count as wearing no armor, in effect unlocking Unarmored Defense (with that con bonus, barbarians will love it) and monk features. If that's not enough, +1 AC in light armor if you can see your attacker would make it pretty beefy.)
Overall, I like what's being done, EXCEPT for Dragonmarks, partially because of the fluff of the Eberron setting.
In the Eberron setting, the appearance of the Dragonmarks allowed these clans to become a powerful, mercantile guild that has a basic stranglehold on their domain of influence.
This feat allows casting a spell once per day, and needing to expend the full components.
How is that going to make a bunch of halflings more powerful than a group of wizards?
Really, I think it should be something more like "Can cast spell 1/day without components, then can cast (maybe X/Day) as ritual at 50% component cost."
Reading the Eberron books, most people who have Dragonmarks aren't using components for their spell-like abilities; which is ACTUALLY what they are. I'm not sure I dig the idea of "they are really just casting the spell".
I feel the feat should give some benefit that if you had a BUNCH of people with the feat, that there would be a positive economic benefit that would explain why the Dragonmarked Houses are the massive political players that they are.
Right now, it's just a single spell. I do like that you don't need to take four feats to get it to grow in power, but right now it doesn't mesh the mechanics and fluff in a meaninful way to me.
Gunthar wrote:
CorrinAvatan wrote:
CorrinAvatan wrote:
Looked at the pdf, and I think it sucks. Quoting another dude who puts it better than I could have:
Dragonmarks are tied to mental stats, so they're most useful to classes like the Wizard, Cleric and Druid and least useful to classes like the Rogue or the Fighter. This is really hilarious, because the whole point of Dragonmarks is that it gave non-spellcasters the ability to replicate spells en masse. 5e!
Also, for Eberron, the setting built explicitly around there being large amounts of low level items and giving both PCs and NPCs greater ease in making magical items, there's no way to make permanent magical items! 5e!
Also for dragonmarks, Mark of Storm apparently can't fulfill it's main purpose. And you can't even get one until level 4! 5e!
Also, they removed everything artificers had that wasn't spellcasting, even though more then half the time artificers were wading into combat. This damn edition!
Don't forget the changelings, who can now only change shape into people they've seen!
On the subject of balance I'm glad Shifters have only one +1 to two stats, but hey, for a full minute once per day, they can upgrade it to a second +1! You took Wildhunt so you'd be a master hunter and tracker? Hope your prey is only a minute away!
These rules tell me two things: Mike Mearls is the laziest designer alive, and he has no idea what Eberron even is.
I wonder if all those people who screamed about FR being killed in 4e will do the same for Eberron now...?
Bud_the_CHUD wrote:
The quote presented by Bud_the_Chud pretty much sums it up for me as well.
JohnLynch, I have to disagree.
Not only does the presented 5e Artificer not fulfill the Concept, it doesn't even do so mechanically. The Infuse 'X' abilities do not match the abilities of what an Artificer was, and is intended to be. First and foremost though, any ability to actively be a Magical Tinkerer, Mechanic or Engineer is absent in both concept and mechanics.
These rules tell me two things: Mike Mearls is the laziest designer alive, and he has no idea what Eberron even is.
Before I try to discuss the issue, I do have one question: Are you satisfied with any of 5th edition LupusRegalias? Half of it? Most of it? Almost none of it?
I'd ask for your thoughts on what mechanical concepts you feel the artificer doesn't meet. But if you're dissastisfied with the vast majority of 5th edition then I'd hardly find it surprising that you dislike the Artificer.
This is what I use for my Eberron Campaign, been using it for the last couple of months, Sorry its a long post:-
Changeling - +2 Dex, +1 Con or Cha
Advantage on saving throws vs charmed or sleep effects.
Proficieny in one of the following skills: Deception, Indimidation, Insight.
Disguise Self as first level spell, expect disguise is tactile as well as visual
Changes = cha mod+1 times per day reset on a long rest (min 1) change stays in effect till 0 hit points or new appearance chosen.
Warforged - +2 Con +1 Str
Proficiency in Athletics
Condition Imunities: exhaustion effects, diease, poison, sleep, paraylsis, fatigue.
Vulnerabilitiy to Lightning, Rusting or Heating: Double Damage.
Does not need to breathe, eat etc - Rest = 4hrs recharging.
Basic natural AC = 12 Access to all weapons and shields
Shifter - +2 Dex, +1 Wis
Darkvison 60ft
Proficiency in Athletics & Acrobatics - if taken via class as well the prof is equal to double prof.
Vulnerability to Silvered Weapons: Double Damage
1 shiter trait on generation - length of shift, con mod = minutes (min 1), can be shifted a number of times = con mod +1 per day reset on a long rest
Shifter Traits:
Beasthide: While shifting, a beasthide shifter gains +2 bonus to Con and natural armour that provides a +2 bonus to AC.
Longtooth: While shifting, a longtooth shifter gains +2 bonus to Strength and grows fangs that can be used as a natural weapon dealing 1d6 points of damage with a successful bite attack. She can only use her bite once per turn.
Cliffwalker: While shifting, a cliffwalker shifter gains a +2 bonus to Dexterity and takes not penalty to climbing.
Razerclaw: While shifting, a razorclaw shifter gains a +2 bonus to Strength and grows claws that can be used as natural weapons. These claws deal 1d4 points of damage with each successful attack. She can attack with both claws if she has does not have a weapon to hand and use a single claw attack if she is using a one handed weapon only and her other hand is empty of any weapon or shield.
Longstrider: While shifting, a longstrider shifter gains +2 bonus to Dexterity and a bonus of +10 feet to land based movement.
Wildhunt: While shifting, a wildhunt shifter gains a +2 bonus to constitution and scent ability. This ability allows a shifter to detect approaching enemies, sniff out hidden foes, and track by sense of smell. A wildhunt sifter can identify familiar odors just as a human does familar sights. A wildhunt shifter can detect opponents with in 30 feet by sense of smell. If the opponent is upwind, the range increases to 60 feet; if downwind it drops to 15 feet. Strong scents, such as smoke or rotting garbage, can be detected at twice the ranges noted above. Overpowering scents, such as skunk musk or troglodyte stench, can be detected at triple normal range. These stronger scents can bloxk other scents, so they can sometimes be used to confuse or hamper this shifter trait. When a wildhunt shifter detects a scent, the exact location of the source isn't revealed.
We do not use the Articifer but have produced a Warlock based class called and Animator:-
Animator: Subclass of Warlock.
Class Features:
Hit Dice: 1d8
Hit Points at Higher Levels 1d8 (or 5) + Con mod
Gains Spells, Spell Slots and Invocations as per a warlock (no pacts)
Ability Modifiers at 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th & 19th.
Magic ability Charisma.
Proficiencies:
Armour: Light, Medium & Shields
Weapons: Simple Melee Weapons & All Crossbows
Tools: Thaumatological Tools
Saving Throws: Intelligence, Charisma
Skills: Thaumology and One other from Arcana, History or Investigation
Equipment:
Studded Leather or Chain Shirt
Two simple melee weapons and Light Crossbow and 20 bolts
Explorers Pack or b) Dungeoneer’s Pack
Arcane Wrench, Two Daggers, Overalls or Lab Coat.
Class Boons:
@1st Mental Communication with any construct
Ritual Caster: (as feat but can add any ritual spell you find to the book, and can cast any Spell from the Animator spell list which has the ritual tag without using any spell slot, you also learn 1 additional Ritual spell each level above 1st Max Ritual level 5th)
@2nd Gain Innvocations.
@3rd Ability to build Tiny Constructs CR ½. At no time can you have more than 1 + ½ cha bonus rounded up of constructs under your control. Does not include your dumb transport constructs.
@ 4th Ability Score increase or Feat.
@5th Construct a Steed – Equivalent to a Riding Horse, carring capacity of 500lbs
@6th Ability to build Small Constructs CR 2
Hack Thauma Technology – DC contest against tech level, Thauma Tools. Cha + prof.
@7th as warlock
@8th Ability Score increase or feat.
@9th Build Medium Construct CR 4
@10th Build a Vehicle/Wagon carry capacity 6000lb. Summon & Commune with Elementals – Bind for 1 yr if elemental fails saving throw against Cha DC. Elementals to power vehicles only. If the elemental saves you cannot attempt to re-bind until you have taken a long rest to attempt to recast on the same creature
@11th Animator Arcanum – Mass Animate Armour and Weapons. 1/3 Warlock level rounded down of items for 24hrs.
@12th Ability score increase or feat
@13th Arcanum – Summon and bind planar creatures. Max CR 6 24hrs Elementals, Fiends & Celestials if fail initial save. They can attempt to resave on summoner taking a short rest. Bound into metal skin, no change to the natural armour class or abilities.
@14th Build a Boat. Carry capacity of 20,000lbs Summoned Elementals are perma bound if failed save throw.
@15th Inhabit Construct. (similar as magic jar) Build Warforged if you can find creation forge – warforged will be free willed.
@16th Ability score increase or feat
@17th Arcanum – Limited Wish – Can only be used to cast any 8th level or lower spell. Spell is cast at 9th spell level.
@18th Build an Ornithopter, carry capacity 2000lbs.
@19th Ability score increase or feat
@20th Signature Spell as per Wizard 20th level.
Class Innvocations:
Voice of the Construct Master – prerequisite 5th level
can communicate telepathically with any of your constructs as long as they are on the same plane of existence. Additionally while you are perceiving through the construct you can also speak through it even if it can speak itself.
Chain of Carceri - prerequisite 15th level
You can cast Hold Monster at will – targeting a celestial, fiend or elemental without expending a spell slot. You must finish a long rest before you can use this invocation on the same creature again.
Construction Times:
Standard constructs time to build is 10 downtime days per CR, 10 days for the steed. 20 days for the boat. 40 days for the boat. 100 days for the Ornithopter.
Wagon, Boat & Ornithopter must have bound elemental to power them, earth, water & air respectively.
Spell List:
Cantrips: Eldritch Blast, Mage Hand, Rest Construct (as spare the dying), Light, Mending, Message, Shocking Grasp, Thaumatology, Prestidigiation.
1st Level: Repair Construct (cure wounds), Damage Construct (inflict wounds), Unseen servant, Hex, Burning Hands, Detect Magic (ritual), Comprehend Language (ritual)
2nd Level: Control Construct (charm person), Lesser Construct Restoration, Shatter, Locate Construct 1000ft, Invisibility to Constructs.
3rd Level: Reboot (Revivify), Animate Armour & Weapons, Fireball, Counterspell, Dispel Magic, Protection from Energy, Turn Construct, Locate Construct 1mile.
4th Level: Hold Construct (Hold Person), Dimension Door, Wall of Fire, Locate Construct 10miles, Compel Construct (compulsion)
5th Level: Reconstruct (Resurrection), Greater Construct Restoration, Cloudkill, Flame Strike, Locate Construct 100miles, Mass Repair, Teleportation Circle, Animate Objects.
6th Level: Mass Animate Armour and Weapons
7th Level: Summon & Bind Planar Creatures: Celestials, Fiends & Elementals. Max CR 6 duration 24hrs. Bound into metal skin, no change to armour class. DC Charisma Sv repeat save every short rest, if successful cannot rebind same creature for 24hrs.#
8th Level: Inhabit Construct (similar to magic jar)
9th Level: Limited Wish – Can only be used to duplicate any spell of 8th level or less.
I think the wording of Infuse Scroll needs tweaking slightly. Replace "until you use the scroll" with "until the scroll is used". Reason: suppose you give the scroll to someone else and they, not you, use it?
Have you thought about an artificier with the feats "craft talisman" (from Oriental Adventures) and "scribe tatoo" (from Races of Faerun) and Inscribe Rune "Player's guide of Faerun"? Or "attune gem" (magic of Faerun),Construct Grafter (Faith of Eberron) or Graft Flesh. There are more item creation feats... what if there is a module about steampunk technology?
The return of the half-golem template from MM II (3rd Ed.) could be possible? I imagine the half-golems like living constructs. The artificier could be useful to heal half-golems with "repair damage" spell.
* Could the artificier to craft a magic version of d20 Future tech?
* The alchemical warforged was canon, wasn´t it? In my setting the warforged maybe like the D&D version of the cylons from Galactica, the classic from sci-fi, the rebellion by machines.
LuisCarlos17f wrote:
iserith wrote:
JohnLynch wrote:
LupusRegalis wrote:
Whatev's, here's an awesome Eberron party I just created having been inspired by the new rules. Expect to see a heist scenario involving these pulp heroes posted in the next week or so...
Tchotchke d'Cannith, human wizard 3 (guild artisan)
A scion of House Cannith excoriated for creating Colonel Clank after the Treaty of Thronehold
Colonel Clank, warforged fighter 3 (soldier)
The latest model of warforged, designed for command and ruthless efficiency
Billy Gruff, shifter rogue 3 (criminal)
The meanest second-story man in the business
The Visage, changeling bard 3 (charlatan)
Jack and Jill of all trades, Master and Mistress of Disguise
I like the Warforged's +1 AC. It means it wont go away with armor and yet retains unique-ness as a tough race. That said, I'm houseruling the Con bonus to +2.
The Artificer, name aside, is a good subclass.
mrsrockguru wrote:
The sorcerer can have a natural AC of 13 + dex mod, and the warlock can conjure the same by casting mage armor at will (assuming each selects the ability to do so). Instead of giving the warforged a +1 AC bonus that can make them über-tanky (full plate and shield giving them an AC of 21 with possible magic bonuses on top, and a racial boost to Con for extra HP) I could see them having a natural AC of 13 + dex mod, unless a standard protection combo would provide better (so a warforged monk with 20 Dex and Wis would have an AC of 20 with unarmored defence, as that's better than their natural armor plus dex mod of 18). Heavier plating could then be equipment that can be bolted onto their frame, but armor proficiency restrictions apply to the extra armor. I would say they shouldn't be able to wear normal armor if they have any bolted on.
Otherwise I could see having warforged require specialty armor in order to gain any benefit from it, as they are living constructs and lack the normal meat-bag vulnerable spots. I'd say that they also do not suffer fatigue from wearing it all of the time, even during rests, as it is literally bolted onto them. Normal armor proficiencies would apply for use, and here's something I whipped up:
Plating / AC / Cost / Stealth / Strength
Light
Scout / 12 + Dex mod / 25 gp / — / —
Medium
Basic / 14 + Dex mod (max 2) / 50 gp / Disadvantage / —
Advanced / 14 + Dex mod (max 2) / 400 gp / — / —
Heavy
Mithril / 16 / 200 gp / Disadvantage / Str 13
Adamantine / 18 / 1,500 gp / Disadvantage / Str 15
Captain_Kobold wrote:
LupusRegalis wrote:
LupusRegalis wrote:
With attunement for magic items being in 5th edition I had expected the Artificer to play around with the attunement system.
The Eberron artificer is also an expert at traps, passable in combat (medium armor and simple weapons), quite capable of enhancing those weapons to perfectly suit the situation, and not so skilled at super-sophisticated magic on the spur of the moment. All four of those utterly fail with the wizard (though you get a partial pass on the first one for criminal wizards).
Artificer, using existing classes, is a multiclass wizard/rogue or bard/rogue (the latter works especially well if artisan's tools replace instruments as a magic focus, but doesn't have Intelligence as a key stat anywhere). But even that comes with baggage it shouldn't have, as I noticed earlier. And in either case, attaching it as a subclass of wizard is a problem.
I should note that refluffing - something I STRONGLY support - was good enough for Keith as well - but it wasn't actually doing enough. His artificer was a cleric with plenty of refluffing - but it also had a custom domain and no Turn Undead.
I should also note that the rules for creating magic items are exactly as optional as those for spreading rumors, cavorting, or buying a business. The first two are something that anyone could reasonably do in any game, and it makes oddly no sense if they're considered disallowed by default. The third is similar - and, in fact, whenever anyone asks "What do we do with all of this gold if there's no expensive items to buy?", one of the first default responses is usually "buy land / a business", so the default assumption there is that it's present (if regulated). The creation rules are in the same section and lack any specific caveat text, so presumably they're no different - present, but regulated. In this case, they're regulated with the formulas, of which we have zero examples.
Finally, even if a DM isn't reflexively banhammering item creation, they can still regulate how it works through that formula! There's no rules for placing them, so even if the item creation rules were in the damn PHB as an always-on mandatory rule, item creation would still be DM fiat because the needed formulas are missing. And even then, it's not likely that the formulas will just be "pay 2000 gold for raw materials and spend two months at the forge casting Magic Weapon every day" - you might need to be an elf to make some items (not all artificers are elves), or work under a full moon (time-limited), or require a rare component or special location (adventure-limited), or any number of other limitations.
That's a point I emphasized on my take of the artificer. It does give the PCs ways to get formulas - but only for items the DM was already including in the game, so it can't be used to turbo-upgrade the team. A player also has no way of knowing exactly what's in the formula until it's too late to reverse the process, and the DM is free to give items he doesn't want duplicated out simply by making their formulas prohibitive or impossible to fulfil (the artificer knew the risk when he started).
Incidentally, he does also have a way of playing around with the attunement system, though (since magic items aren't necessarily as common as to require that) it's not a mandatory part of the class.
Tempest_Stormwind wrote:
In a previous edition, I remember being excited at playing an artificier, making all kinds of magical doodads and gadgets to toos at the enemy, and giggle as the monsters and villains swatted, disentangled, and otherwise divested themselves of my creations. I was very, very gnomish in my artificiering. I even said "Go, Go, Gadget..." a few times.
When I think of an artificier, I think of a magical tinker, a magical engineer, a magical scientist. A mad scientist, in fact.
Frankly, the artificier, as it stands, bores me. To look at it from another angle, imagine the artificier was just another subclass, alongside the other wizarding traditions. There's no flash, no bang, no fun. There is no part of this artificier where I read it and thought "That sounds like fun." It's transitioned from "mad scientist chucking his creations at his enemies and sometimes his friends" to "magic item factory."
No thanks.
I liked the races, though.
It's a shame they couldn't include certain things due to lack of Psionics rules for 5E. Primarily the Kalashtar, but I was also looking forward to the idea of Psiforged as a Warforged subrace. Give the base race the Con bonus (which I agree should probably be +2) and Living Construct, then have a "Battleforged" subrace with the +1 Str and AC, and a "Psiforged" subrace with +1 Int and some ability that would benefit a psion, presumably some extra power points or some limited psionic spellcasting.
In light of +2/+1 being the standard racial bonuses in the full release, versus these which seem more in line with the "D&D Next" playtest races' +1/+1s, I think I would run the base Shifter race as giving +1 Dex and have the subraces all grant +2 in their respective abilities, except for Cliffwalk, Longstride, and Razorclaw, which would give +1 Dex and +1 Str, Con, and Wis respectively.
Here's a thought: remake the artificer as a Bard College -
Level 3: Proficiency in thieves' tools (and medium armor?), gain a "mechanical companion" (as Find Familiar, but gains the construct type, can also choose Homunculus)
Level 3: Jury Rig (learn the Mending cantrip, use Bardic Inspiration to heal constructs)
Level 6: Cunning Action (thieves' tools, Use An Object, familiar actions [senses, dismiss/summon])
Level 14: Magical Aptitude: use BI to restore charges or daily uses to a magic item
What do you guys think?
delroland wrote:
As for the issue of not being able to have a dragonmark until 4th level due to it being a feat, maybe it would be nice to have a dragonmarked background, or a few different versions that gave you some minor spell-like feature that did not have any mechanical impact in-game. Possibly with a requirement that you take the Dragonmark feat as soon as you can.
darius wrote:
Oriet wrote:
QuestorTelloc wrote:
masterfat78 wrote:
* If a spellcaster with dragonmarks get a spell-like power.... could spend a spell slot to cast like spontaneous magic the power from the dragonmark?
* What about the khalastar, have we to wait until the psionic powers?
* What if the artificier craft bombs and magic munition what is used by the other players or nPC allies? Then the bonus attacks used in the attacks would be by the allies, not the artifcier.
* Can artificier create machines like the combo vehicles from the videogame "Dead Rising 3"?
* What if a player wants an artificier who could craft all the canon no-magic alchemicl products from previous editions?
So, speculation on the next UA; I am thinking Dragonlance.
Kender seems a given; and...
Races: Gully Dwarf, Irda, Minotaur?
Subclasses: Knights of Solamnia, Wizards of High Sorcery?
LuisCarlos17f wrote:
I think many in this thread are underestimating just how powerful +1 AC is for warforged.
A level 1 fighter can manage a 19 AC, at a time when most monsters have a +3 to hit. That is incredibly strong. Even some CR 3 monsters will be hitting the PC only 25% of the time, less if he gets some money to invest in armor.
That's pretty good.
RCanine wrote:
Yunru wrote:
As a fan of the artificer (I have a character class in my homebrew world that is roughly equivalent to an artificer) I am not at all a fan of this proposed artificer. I thought "give up a spell slot while a potion you made exists" was a stupid rule for wizards crafting potions during the playtest, and my opinion of it hasn't changed.
MechaPilot wrote:
* An artificier who using all time crafting potions wouldn´t a true artificier but an alchemist. For me a D&D articier is a spellcaster who craft magic gadgets.
* What about verbal components? If infustions don´t cause sound then the assasins and another stealth classes could use the silent artificier's infusions.
* Artificier class needs its own style. It can´t be only a wizard who craft lot of magic item.
* Is the artificier the D&D version of Batman's belt or McGyver's pocket?
* If there is a future module about steampunk technology... then we will see a "magical-mechanic"... and the artificier has lot of cards, lots of possibilities to be that "magic-mechanic" (will see a D&D plumber with magic powers whose name could be Mario?)
* Maybe my own concept of D&D articier is a spellcaster too linked to magic machines and gadgets.
LuisCarlos17f wrote:
Tempest_Stormwind wrote:
Not being a fan of Eberron, nor having played any of the character options that it introduced (artificer, et al.), I really don't have much of an opinion on a lot of this stuff. It is, however, interesting to see the different views and opinions on the bits and bobs adressed in the UA download. It's also good that you are all voicing your opinions in a (mostly, as far as I can tell) constructive manner—like Kieth Baker said on his blog:
"The upshot of this is that your opinion matters. These aren’t final mechanics – they are ideas. Do you like the artificer as a wizard subclass, or would you prefer to see something that is more closely modeled on the 3.5 artificer? Are you comfortable with warforged “wearing” armor, or would you rather see something like the old adamantine/mithral body feats? Post your thoughts, here or anywhere else, and let people know what you like or dislike; it could make a difference for the next stage in Eberron’s development."
So, go on, keep the discussion open, healthy, and ongoing. This can help shape an agreed view on what should be, and what the final draft may look like. Good on you, Eberron fans. 
@Tempest_Stormwind:
I agree that the general assumption is that a caster would be a fool to let a consumable item whose continued existence prohibits her from recovering a spell slot out onto the open market with no expiration date, but that some player is going to try. Players try just about everything at one point or another.
While I don't mind the scrolls as scrolls so much, I do agree with you that the artificer would probably be more in keeping with the Eberron tradition of airships and elemental trains if the scrolls were magi-tech constructs instead.
I mentioned that my world has a type of wizard similar to an artificer. It is called a crystal mage. A crystal mage can perform a special ritual to magically program a crystal to store magical energy and quickly release it in the form of a specific spell. The way I have opted to handle this is with a creation cost for the crystal that includes both the value of the crystal itself and the cost of the materials needed for the ritual. A crystal mage can cast a spell slot into a crystal, with the crystal holding that energy indefinitely, and without sacrificing the regaining of the expended spell slot. The additional magic available to the caster is balanced by having less magic on the day the crystal is energized, and by the cost of the crystal and the ritual.
My solution probably wouldn't work for everyone because it really does put magic item crafting into a class, and I know some people just won't want that (plus I'm sure I'll get some comments about how overpowered it is if a mage can retain spellslots that are unspent at the end of the day as long as they have enough spell crystals to hold onto them).
I like the "replace scroll infusion" with "create arcane device" idea and will immediately be using it with all artificers henceforth.
Tempest_Stormwind wrote:
Ignominia wrote:
The design of each new class has got different parts:
- The mark of identity, the concept, the archetype, the idea, the background.
- The gameplay. Of course with a righ balance of power to avoid abuses by munchkins, and to avoid to be too specialiced, but also it has to be fun.
- Own style.
----
How do I imagine the D&D artificier? I have said it, like a magic inventor, like the crazy tinker gnomes from Dragonlance. He isn´t a wizards who crafts potions, but a magic mechanical who craft arcane gadgets.
The artificier should to can search and disarm traps (or even to create them), at least a subclass.
* If there are at-will spells, then the artificier has got the right to use clockpunk crossbows what reload itself.
* If there is a future module about steampunk technology, then maybe, or we ought to see a pack of class features for variant class to play a steampunk artificier.
* I would like a future monster template to change for living being (animal or humanoid) to living construct (half-golems) and from construct to living contruct (incarnate construct, from "Savage Species").
* What if a evil artificier would create his own version of raggamoffyn (MM II 3rd Ed) to create an army of loyal captureds?
* Wait a moment... if an artificier spend all the spell slots to create infusions/arcanes devices in the morning... then the rest of the day could wear armour...(or a clockpunk exosuit/exoarmour/powered exoeskeleton).
LuisCarlos17f wrote:
Captain_Kobold wrote:
That_Blasted_Somoflange wrote:
Something to keep in mind. 5e has an entirely new balance when it comes to spellcasters. They do not want the spellcaster domination of yesteryears. So, someone with the potential to both be a back row "bomber," bow caster / magic gun, a potions master? Allowing them to be a front row fighter on like a 3e cleric could (which was part of the 3e artificer design) could be problematic. There's a balance here where gish options are carefully watched.
That part of the class may very well need to be sacrificed, simply because there's no room in the current paradigm for it. Or added to the side of the Eldritch Knight / Arcane Trickster using an artificer theme.
Mephi1234 wrote:
Mephi1234 wrote:
Mephi1234 wrote:
Captain_Kobold wrote:
That_Blasted_Somoflange wrote:
Here is how I consider changing the artificer. Keep in mind that the wording is fuddled a bit, that is purely me, and some abilities may have to be shuffled around level wise.
Artificer
2nd level
You can expend your arcane recovery towards the cost of crafting an item. So if you would recover 2 spell levels, it will be 2 gold pieces.
You must still possess the proper proficiency.
2nd level
Recharge wands. You may spend your arcane recovery to recharge a wand/magic item of its charges. The item regains a number of charges equal to your arcane recovery levels.
6th level.
Superior artificer
When using your arcane recovery to craft items, the bonus is doubled.
Additionally, by spending 10 minutes focusing on two magic items, you may transfer a number of charges from one to the other.
10th level:
Extra attunement. You may attune one extra magic item. You may also attune wands that are not normally able to be attuned, wands attuned in this fashion are not destroyed on a roll of 1 if all charges are used.
14th level
Master Artificer stays the same.
* About warforged. He doesn´t need water or food, and he can cross deserts. He doesn´t need breath, and that makes him inmune to (no-acid) poisonous gases, and drowing isn´t a danger for him...but what about in naval battles? Can a warforged to swim or diving? Warforged could be used to test submarine vehicles or to build submarine cities or to fight againts sea humanoids.
* What about an artificier subclass to work in a spelljammer or a skyship?
* Could "mindless living armours" be created like warforgeds? A warforged without mind but could be used like an armour or a mecha robot.
* Have you thought about a "racial parangon class" for shifters and no-core races?
* About the changelings... how to create a campaing about a "secret invasion"? Could changelings be used to create a "super-skrull"? Could a changelling subrace create natural armour and weapons (for example a spiked tentacle?)
* Races and artificier from Eberron have to be designed to be used in settins out of Eberron, for example Spelljammer or Planescape.
* If the artificiers are the D&D version of Leonardo di Vince... why not to invet motocycles or automobiles?
LuisCarlos17f wrote:
* A living armour would possible if there is a module about monster allies, and grafts or simbionts creatures because the rules and game mechanics would be similar.
* Have started the indutrial revolution in Eberron? Why firearms haven´t replaced the swords and shields in the battlefiel?d
* If an artificier could use the spell "repair damage"... why not a "cause damage" to break enemies' gadgets? (for example bowstrings of bows and crossbows).
* Could artificiers use living plants to create weapons like the peashooter from videogame "plants vs zombies", or living traps, like a crossbow what reloads itself?
* If a female shifter in the cover of a sourcebook had got cat ears... (like the neko-girls)... would shifters become more popular?
* If a necromancer could create an army of undeads... why not an artificier to create an army of constructs or monster plants with biopunk grafts?
Captain_Kobold wrote:
LuisCarlos17f wrote: