Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 6 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Just curious to see how they will implement Monk

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Any particular reason, like is it Balance or theming? Cause if former I got nothing to help on that, 5e balance is probably going to continue as it always has. If it is the latter, they are very very easy to retheme by nature even without the tasha's thing, cause Eldritch Cannons can just be wands so you are a wandmaker, and Battlesmith can just be a golemancer so their Steel Defender is less mechanical and more lumpy stone and metal. The armorer is arguably the hardist but it can pulled back in description to just runic enchantments and not the weird suits they describe now.
Regardless, not liking it is valid, even if it is just "Don't like it cause don't like it", though I tend to agree with Old Soul that it is a bit incomplete without it cause I want Artificer to be a mainstay.
(Then again, I am one of those that want Bloodhunter to finally be considered official at some point so we can have that weird not natural fighter but somewhat magical class niche filled.)

Mostly because even if you reskin it, it's a highly magical class, that is not self contained.

A wizard is magical, but it's the wizard.
A paladin is magical, but it's the paladin.

Even if you reskin them (and I would have to, I don't like Eberron) you have a class making objects around them, Magical.

It's a deviation from the start.

Not sure if I'm explaining that well but, it's daylight savings time, and I'll be braindead today...

So your saying you don't like it cause its a support magic based class?

Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
No, I don't like the class, because it can by existing raise the level of magic in the world, outside of itself.

It's a world building issue, and as a player class I don't like the concept.

Potions? Fine. However while yes we can reskin them, I have massive issues with the Iron Man, Blaster, and Pet versions.

They will never exist within my setting, that's for sure.

Joined: Jan 2021
N
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
N
Joined: Jan 2021
I am curious how Paladins and along with them smites will be implemented in the game

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
No, I don't like the class, because it can by existing raise the level of magic in the world, outside of itself.

It's a world building issue, and as a player class I don't like the concept.

Potions? Fine. However while yes we can reskin them, I have massive issues with the Iron Man, Blaster, and Pet versions.

They will never exist within my setting, that's for sure.

Not really, at least if they still follow the rules like in 3.5 Magic crafting. For a artificer to craft any item it would require XP, materials (gold cost), and something else don't remember. The construction though, would be at a reduced cost compared to say a wizard, because they are specialists in that field of study. Crafting should follow the same system the feat or ritual or whatever its called goes by. Crafting period always required a XP cost and you couldn't down grade your level, so there is a cap and a pretty big drawback in making stuff, gimping yourself in the long run if you over do it.

anyway you do you

Last edited by fallenj; 15/03/21 08:42 PM.
Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by Scribe
No, I don't like the class, because it can by existing raise the level of magic in the world, outside of itself.

It's a world building issue, and as a player class I don't like the concept.

Potions? Fine. However while yes we can reskin them, I have massive issues with the Iron Man, Blaster, and Pet versions.

They will never exist within my setting, that's for sure.

Not really, at least if they still follow the rules like in 3.5 Magic crafting for a artificer still requires a XP cost but, at a reduced cost because of they are specialists in that field of study. Crafting should follow the same system the feat or ritual or whatever its called goes by. Crafting period always required a XP cost and you couldn't down grade your level, so there is a cap and a pretty big cost in making stuff.

anyway you do you

I'd have to look, but I'm almost positive 5e doesn't have those costs associated.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by Scribe
No, I don't like the class, because it can by existing raise the level of magic in the world, outside of itself.

It's a world building issue, and as a player class I don't like the concept.

Potions? Fine. However while yes we can reskin them, I have massive issues with the Iron Man, Blaster, and Pet versions.

They will never exist within my setting, that's for sure.

Not really, at least if they still follow the rules like in 3.5 Magic crafting for a artificer still requires a XP cost but, at a reduced cost because of they are specialists in that field of study. Crafting should follow the same system the feat or ritual or whatever its called goes by. Crafting period always required a XP cost and you couldn't down grade your level, so there is a cap and a pretty big cost in making stuff.

anyway you do you

I'd have to look, but I'm almost positive 5e doesn't have those costs associated.

I couldn't find it in the freebe & don't have the books, generally any spellcaster should be able to do what artificers do but not as good. Originally 3.5 had the feat in phb, in 4e they put the crafting feature under "Rituals" in phb.

Oh and if your right and they did away with xp, material, and whatever cost for crafting, it would be really broken.

Last edited by fallenj; 15/03/21 08:46 PM.
Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
I think (based on what I could find on my phone) that it's gold and rest time.

It's whatever. I don't particularly care for the concept, the Iron Man and Blaster subclasses are particularly egregious, but that's why we all have the ability to do what we like in our own games, take what we like, ignore the rest.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
I think (based on what I could find on my phone) that it's gold and rest time.

It's whatever. I don't particularly care for the concept, the Iron Man and Blaster subclasses are particularly egregious, but that's why we all have the ability to do what we like in our own games, take what we like, ignore the rest.

Kind of sad & true true later scribe

Joined: Jan 2017
G
enthusiast
Online Content
enthusiast
G
Joined: Jan 2017
Crafting in D&D 5e isn't very well defined, but it generally involves a material cost (usually half of the sale price in gold, unless it requires special ingredients or something like that) and time (downtime proportional to the amount of work that needs to be done). Some of this is described in the Player's Handbook and the DM Guide. There's a lot more in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, but much of it is still on the vague side. There are a lot of good homebrewed rules for crafting. I haven't seen any version that involves an XP cost.

Joined: Sep 2015
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2015
As a mad scientist I want the artificer in the game, even if it would probably not be my first char.
I would probably play them as gnome, they are known for being nuts, think of Jan Jansen.

Since Larian makes the game, a robo pet or summoned cannons would probably not be the craziest stuff in the game.


groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Joined: Jan 2017
G
enthusiast
Online Content
enthusiast
G
Joined: Jan 2017
I think artificers would be disappointing in a video game. Half of the fun is coming up with oddball contraptions and other nonsense that they could never accommodate in a video game. Following recipes is boring.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Berzerker Barbarian
Oathbreaker Paladin/Paladin of Vengence
Hexblade for Warlock
Champion for Fighter

I would say id like to see bard but unless they add the colledge of swords I highly doubt I would ever consider main playing a bard.

Sorcerer - Is the lowest on the list I am looking forward too and from looks of it lower on the list to be added. Sadly I expect it will be a while before we see monk as well.

I feel most probable next class to see added will be paladin barbarian or bard. With barbarian probably being the most likely which is a cheer as much as paladin or barbarian would both make me happy personally.

Joined: Nov 2020
addict
Online Content
addict
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Scribe
Originally Posted by CJMPinger
Any particular reason, like is it Balance or theming? Cause if former I got nothing to help on that, 5e balance is probably going to continue as it always has. If it is the latter, they are very very easy to retheme by nature even without the tasha's thing, cause Eldritch Cannons can just be wands so you are a wandmaker, and Battlesmith can just be a golemancer so their Steel Defender is less mechanical and more lumpy stone and metal. The armorer is arguably the hardist but it can pulled back in description to just runic enchantments and not the weird suits they describe now.
Regardless, not liking it is valid, even if it is just "Don't like it cause don't like it", though I tend to agree with Old Soul that it is a bit incomplete without it cause I want Artificer to be a mainstay.
(Then again, I am one of those that want Bloodhunter to finally be considered official at some point so we can have that weird not natural fighter but somewhat magical class niche filled.)

Mostly because even if you reskin it, it's a highly magical class, that is not self contained.

A wizard is magical, but it's the wizard.
A paladin is magical, but it's the paladin.

Even if you reskin them (and I would have to, I don't like Eberron) you have a class making objects around them, Magical.

It's a deviation from the start.

Not sure if I'm explaining that well but, it's daylight savings time, and I'll be braindead today...

Makes sense, I don't see it the same but I can see where you come from.

Joined: Sep 2015
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2015
Sorry, but I see no reasons against adding artificers.

Yes, this is a magic world. But this does not mean that science does not exist.
Yes, a wizard can throw fireballs, but the average soldier cannot. So every army would be happy if they have someone who can build cannons.
I also see no fundamental difference between building a robot, creating a golem or summon an elemental.
Its just different ways to create a (more or less) loyal minion.

Unless you say that arcanum is the future of DnD ( magic causes science failure and vice versa) I see no reason to avoid a class that does a different form of magic.
I have no problems at all with alchemists in Kingmaker, even though their spells are technically potions.

If we put the "because its magic" argument to the extreme, someone could argue: Why does anybody use weapons when you can have magic?


groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Joined: Jan 2021
S
addict
Offline
addict
S
Joined: Jan 2021
That wasn't the argument.

#767334 28/03/21 04:12 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
A
stranger
Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Oct 2020
Just tossing this out there. I want to be able to chose one =)
That's all! Good Night!

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
I really hope oath breaker will be something in BG3.

Not especially to choose one but to become one if you're not roleplaying a paladin how you should.
It could be really interresting.

Joined: Oct 2020
S
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
S
Joined: Oct 2020
personally, Artificer is my soul class. And while I know that they said it will be only PHB classes at release, it would be a shame and a lost opportunity if they don't make a DLC later on that brings the Artificer to the game.
Think of the possibilities! The madness! eldritch cannons, infusions, power armor... sure, it would be difficult to implement it all, but worth it a thousand times!

I have, however, also seen opinions on this forum that argue that the artificer doesn't fit into the world (which I disagree with). So, whats your opinion? Who is hyped for the Artificer?

Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
I wouldn’t say no to the artificer class, but I have zero expectation to see it. All of their “spells” are supposed to be the results of various devices they build. That seems to be a pain in the ass to represent properly and if they just cast normal spells there wouldn’t be a point.

Page 6 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5