i have to agree with the mech servant, im playing an artificer in a game and love it. at first having my mech beast was awesome and a great advantage, but as i leveled up and the enemies got stronger it became more of a chore.

at first i went with giant spider, then after some time i figured a giant eagle was better because flying right? but after some time it became more of a liability, trying not to get shot out of the sky. so i took mounted combatant feat.

nice to have for transportation but at higher levels it’s just too weak against stronger enemies

Magic Item Analysis grants them ONLY as rituals, not as conventional spells, and since rituals don’t consume spell slots, there’s no problem. (Cf. Totem barbarian Spirit Seeker feature, etc.)

….This convo just gave me a great idea for a campaign. Bear with me as I give a brief historical aside: Medieval Guns took way less training to be able to use than bows and arrows, which is what made primitive early guns (which were less reliable and effective than bows) so valuable. Guns put peasants on equal footing with Knights and Samurai, since you no longer had to put a lifetime of training into being an effective fighter. For this reason, the gun is sort of a symbol of democracy while the bow and sword are symbols of meritocracy. This is why I think people resist guns in Tabletop RPG’s, because RPG’s inherently bend toward meritocracy. The games are literally about training for a lifetime to become a master at fighting/wizardry/whatever. RPG’s tend to solve the problem by having a gunslinger class that DOES spend his life training with firearms, but what if instead of solving the conflict you leaned into it.

You run a game where the adventurer’s story runs parallel to the invention and perfection of firearms. You keep firearms weak enough that the player’s aren’t interested in using them, then you slowly spread them to more and more enemies until everyone BUT the PC’s use them, and finally you begin upgrading them to the point where they become actually more effective than the PC’s swords and spells. Have the PC’s run out of work because untrained boobs are collecting all the bounties. Force them to become part of gun squads for money. Make them feel like the dregs of a bygone era in a new age of modernity and see how they react to it. That’s a hell of a campaign storyline, if I do say so myself.

I’m home very briefly from the hospital; I think you saw the happy news elsewhere in social media. =)

The downtime that the artificer’s crafting takes up probably isn’t all of it, but yeah, one of the costs of this class (much like the wizard with spell-scribing) is that their core functions sometimes require downtime. In itself, I think that’s fine; other classes SHOULD have similar expectations placed upon them on a social level, if not a mechanical one. (Clerics in particular should have to do something, you know, priestly at some point, right?)

The artificer deciding to sell the stuff they make does open the door to bad problems, though a strict read of the text shows that the Wondrous Inventions are one-time deals (so it’s an infusion of cash, but that’s a downgrade from a magic item in most cases); Mechanical Servants serve YOU and no one else, so you’re going to have very dissatisfied customers; and the Alchemist’s Satchel does nothing by itself. If you don’t have the Alchemical Formulas as class features, what you have is an expensively useless, off-brand purse.

I agree that they’re going in a support-ish direction with the artificer.

No attack rolls, just saving throws.

I get how guns can create an issue at low levels, but an artificer with a gun is different than giving a gun to your level 1 ranger. While guns can pack a punch, so do greatswords and level 1 spells like Witch Bolt. You can keep the gun out of the a low level PCs hands through cost, proficiency requirements, rare ammunition or other means such as not having bad guys packing them (which turns to loot).

From a flavor standpoint, guns best fit modern, steampunk or settings with at least renaissance level tech (seen in the Golden Age of Pirates for example). If I am running a viking or traditional fantasy campaign, I’d be tempted to not allow the Artificer with guns…. but maybe guns are rare, built by gnomes or the PC is a one of a kind inventor…

In the actual play show Critical Role, Percy, one of the PCs uses a gun – a device he invented. It has created some interesting stories in the world as his tech has got into the hands of some people who should not have it. Interesting side note… the PC build started with a Pathfinder Gunslinger and then the DM converted it to 5e when they moved to those rules. You can check it out here:
http://www.dmsguild.com/product/170778/Gunslinger-Martial-Archetype-for-Fighters?src=hottest_filtered&filters=45469

The beast feels kinda tacked on, which is odd because they’ve been very restrictive about companions in 5e. They restricted them to an entire archetype of warlock and ranger, and this one is just there. As you mentioned it doesn’t scale, after that it seems like it would just be a chore to keep up with. I am currently playing a Bladesinger and have a familiar that I love thematically, but mechanically, in combat, it is a chore to keep up with. It also doesn’t seem to match flavor wise with all the other features. You’re and alchemist or a gunsmith and oh btw, you built this crazy advanced robotic AI that can nearly completely mimic and animal? Super weird. I agree that it will probably get reworked before the final release. My bet is it will be turned into its own subclass like “Engineer” or something.

The crafting rules and the handwaving of resources is a major problem in my book. As a DM, the main thing I wanted from an Artificer class is a way to create an NPC that can craft items for my party, with solid rules behind it. There doesn’t seem to be a home-brewed class that does this well either. I did look at the Tribality Alchemist, but maybe I missed something. Feel free to correct me. 🙂

I’m not crazy about the inclusion of guns. While it is always up to the DM which classes, races, etc to include, it inevitably leads to unpleasant conversations. Its bad enough explaining to players why every class they find on the internet isn’t an available option, much less if one became official. While people need to chill out about shoehorning guns into their settings (no one is asking you to do that people), I kinda hate restricting official content.

As you mentioned in comparing to the Warlock, the damage output seems high to me but that might be false positive. There are a couple other oddities about the class too but all in all, I think I’m a fan. I’m sure I’ll think of more the longer this is out.

The other problem is what happens if the Artificer decides to sell the stuff she’s making or ever worse, if the Artificer decides to make stuff for the rest of the party. I guess the problem for the DM is remedied by not giving any other magical stuff, but still the latter gave the DM a level of control. With a player being able to make magical paraphernalia, this level of control is transferred to the ingredients the DM makes available, but still this might be difficult as it will make it evident that the DM wants to limit the players’ power level and this is not appreciated often.

My other concern is the special item of each subclass. For once, it seems way OP to be able to craft such an item in first level. Also, I could not find any RAW limitations for the Alchemist not being able to craft replicates of the said item for other party members of for commercial use.

Putting these problems aside, I liked what I saw. Solid spell list, nice powers overall and I really liked the twist with the Rival thing, nice tool for the DM right there. For many of the FB commenters the class overall seemed a bit toned down on the damage level, but I honestly believe that the Artificer is more about the support and not the outright damage.

And Brandes, I’m pretty sure you’re going to have awesome news really soon. 🙂